257 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11651585)
1. The Metropolitan New York Ethics Committee Network: coming together at a time of concern.
Zuckerman C
Fordham Int Law J; 1993 Mar; 5(2):108-14. PubMed ID: 11651585
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. What role for surrogate decision makers?
Hubbard H
Origins; 1993 Feb; 22(34):576-9. PubMed ID: 11652129
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Foregoing nutrition and hydration.
Nelson LJ
Clin Ethics Rep; 1987 Jan; 1(1):1-7. PubMed ID: 11652511
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Responses to "From ethical dilemma to hospital policy.
Bader D; Miles J
Health Prog; 1991 Nov; 72(9):27-30. PubMed ID: 11645705
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Shared decision making: the ethics of caring and best respect.
Beltran JE
Bioethics Forum; 1996; 12(3):17-25. PubMed ID: 11660305
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. MDs, lawyers probe ethical, legal issues in ending treatment.
Bolsen B
Am Med News; 1984 Apr; 27(13):11-3. PubMed ID: 11653535
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. The tort liability of hospital ethics committees.
Merritt AL
South Calif Law Rev; 1987 Jul; 60(5):1239-97. PubMed ID: 11658947
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Informed consent, termination of medical treatment, and the Federal Tort Claims Act: a new proposal for the military health care system.
Deardorff SE
Mil Law Rev; 1987 Jan; 115():1-120. PubMed ID: 11658904
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Searching for proper judicial recognition of hospital ethics committees in decisions to forego medical treatment.
Murphy CA
Gold Gate Law Rev; 1990; 20(2):319-44. PubMed ID: 11651055
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. The Cruzan legacy: legislative and judicial responses and insights for the future.
Gieszl HC; Velasco PA
Ariz State Law J; 1992; 24(2):719-801. PubMed ID: 11654081
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Recent governmental action regarding the treatment of seriously ill newborns.
Lawton SE; Carder EB; Weisman AW
J Coll Univ Law; 1985; 11(4):405-16. PubMed ID: 11651864
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. A critique of Louisiana's approach to withholding medical treatment from defective newborns.
Goichman G
South Univ Law Rev; 1983; 9(2):157-84. PubMed ID: 11652508
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. I.V. withdrawal: the severance of medicine's or society's umbilical cord? Barber v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County, 137 Cal.App.3d 1006, 195 Cal.Rptr. 484 (1983).
Chrisman JP
Neb Law Rev; 1984; 63(4):941-72. PubMed ID: 11652480
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Stopping treatment on grounds of futility: a role for institutional policy.
Stell LK
St Louis Univ Public Law Rev; 1992; 11(2):481-97. PubMed ID: 11652704
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. VHA ethics rounds:
Bernat JL
NCCE News; 1995; 3(2):4-5. PubMed ID: 11657132
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. In re Quinlan: a synthesis of law and medical technology.
Hyland WF; Baime DS
Rutgers Camden Law J; 1976; 8(1):37-64. PubMed ID: 11663167
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
