244 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11650182)
1. "Two steps forward, one step back": an analysis of New Jersey's latest "right-to-die" decisions.
Moore NJ
Rutgers Law J; 1988; 19(4):955-98. PubMed ID: 11650182
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Moral reasoning and legal change: observations on the termination of medical treatment and the development of law.
Jarrett C
Rutgers Law J; 1988; 19(4):999-1028. PubMed ID: 11650183
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. From Quinlan to Cruzan: patterns in the fabric of US "right-to-die" case law.
Allsopp ME
Humane Med; 1992 Apr; 8(2):122-31. PubMed ID: 11651322
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Whose right is it anyway? Individualism, community, and the right to die: a commentary on the New Jersey experience.
Weinberg JK
Hastings Law J; 1988 Nov; 40(1):119-67. PubMed ID: 11659106
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. In re Storar: the right to die and incompetent patients.
Colabrese CA
Univ Pittsbg Law Rev; 1982; 43(4):1087-107. PubMed ID: 11658613
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health: a clear and convincing call for comprehensive legislation to protect incompetent patients' rights.
Suhr JN
Am Univ Law Rev; 1991; 40(4):1477-519. PubMed ID: 11651350
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. The right to death.
Dworkin R
New York Rev Books; 1991 Jan; ():14-7. PubMed ID: 11653244
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Cruzan and its impact on patient self-determination.
Gilbert LJ
J Fam Law; 1991-1992; 30(1):111-33. PubMed ID: 11659441
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Conroy, best interests, and the handling of dying patients.
Cantor NL
Rutgers Law Rev; 1985; 37(3):543-77. PubMed ID: 11649747
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. DeGrella v. Elston: Kentucky Supreme Court rules on an incompetent's right to die.
Mehrle JP
North KY Law Rev; 1994; 21(2):449-74. PubMed ID: 11653010
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Specific intent, substituted judgment and best interests: a nationwide analysis of an individual's right to die.
Delaney JJ
Pace Law Rev; 1991; 11(3):565-641. PubMed ID: 11651454
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Incompetents and the right to die: in search of consistent meaningful standards.
Strasser M
KY Law J; 1994-1995; 83(4):733-98. PubMed ID: 11654615
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Wishes of patient in refusing care backed in Jersey.
Sullivan JF
N Y Times Web; 1987 Jun; ():A1, B12. PubMed ID: 11647828
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. 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]
19. Cruzan and the right to die: a perspective on privacy interests.
Watson DE
Mercer Law Rev; 1991; 42(3):1147-81. PubMed ID: 11651439
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. The limits of proxy decisionmaking for incompetents.
Buchanan AE
UCLA Law Rev; 1981; 29(2):386-408. PubMed ID: 11660397
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
