257 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11646928)
1. New York rule compounds dilemma over life support.
Belkin L
N Y Times Web; 1992 May; ():A1, B4. PubMed ID: 11646928
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Not bad enough to die: laws force life support on a man who never could consent.
Fein EB
N Y Times Web; 1997 Jul; ():B1-2. PubMed ID: 11648059
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Living wills: the need for uniform state laws.
Warnock HC
Probate Prop; 1991; 5(3):52-6. PubMed ID: 11652620
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Advance directives and the pursuit of death with dignity: New Jersey's new legislation.
Cantor NL
Rutgers Law Rev; 1992; 44(2):335-403. PubMed ID: 11651452
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Withdrawal of life support: conflict among patient wishes, family, physicians, courts and statutes, and the law.
Tarantino LM
Buffalo Law Rev; 1994; 42(2):623-52. PubMed ID: 11652996
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Innovative legislative initiatives: the New Jersey Declaration of Death and Advance Directives for Health Care Acts.
Armstrong PW; Olick RS
Seton Hall Legis J; 1992; 16(1):177-97. PubMed ID: 11653079
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. New York's highest court rejects family's plea in right-to-die case.
Shipp ER
N Y Times Web; 1988 Oct; ():1, 36. PubMed ID: 11646705
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. What role for surrogate decision makers?
Hubbard H
Origins; 1993 Feb; 22(34):576-9. PubMed ID: 11652129
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Privacy I: surrogate decision making for the terminally ill.
Eisenberg KG
Annu Surv Am Law; 1988; 1(2):353-84. PubMed ID: 11652656
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Right to die: a survey of legislative and judicial responses to life-support technology.
Richardson E
Glendale Law Rev; 1981-1982; 5(2):188-202. PubMed ID: 11652441
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. The right to death.
Dworkin R
New York Rev Books; 1991 Jan; ():14-7. PubMed ID: 11653244
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. From medicalization to legalization to politicization: O'Connor, Cruzan, and refusal of treatment in the 1990s.
Johnson SH
Conn Law Rev; 1989; 21(3):685-722. PubMed ID: 11650431
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Medical decisionmaking for the incompetent person: a comprehensive approach.
Marzen TJ
Issues Law Med; 1986 Jan; 1(4):293-317. PubMed ID: 11651815
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Justices find a right to die, but the majority sees need for clear proof of intent.
Greenhouse L
N Y Times Web; 1990 Jun; ():A1, A18, A19. PubMed ID: 11646758
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. The Court's role in decisionmaking involving incompetent refusals of life-sustaining care and psychiatric medications.
Parry JW
Ment Phys Disabil Law Rep; 1990; 14(6):468-76. PubMed ID: 11659325
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Cruzan and the constitutional status of nontreatment decisions for incompetent patients.
Robertson JA
Georgia Law Rev; 1991; 25(5):1139-202. PubMed ID: 11652580
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. The recent amendments to the Texas Natural Death Act: implications for health care providers.
Greenfield RE
St Marys Law J; 1986; 17(3):1003-51. PubMed ID: 11652489
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. New York panel urges widening patients' rights.
Sullivan R
N Y Times Web; 1987 Sep; ():A1, B3. PubMed ID: 11646631
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. The right of the elderly to self-determination and New York's legislative imperative.
Tomlinson AK
Pace Law Rev; 1988; 8(1):63-113. PubMed ID: 11650172
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Living wills in New York: are they valid?
Vile SE
Syracuse Law Rev; 1987; 38(4):1369-95. PubMed ID: 11650137
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
