842 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11652704)
1. 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]
2. Advocating for the dying: the view of family and friends.
Moretti A
Bioethics Forum; 1997; 13(2):27-31. PubMed ID: 11655286
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. Foregoing nutrition and hydration.
Nelson LJ
Clin Ethics Rep; 1987 Jan; 1(1):1-7. PubMed ID: 11652511
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Surrogate decision making for mentally incapacitated adults.
Nelson LJ; Golenski JD
Clin Ethics Rep; 1987 Feb-Mar-Apr; 1(2 3 & 4):1-28. PubMed ID: 11650108
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Minors, medical treatment, and interspousal disagreement: should Solomon split the child?
Feigenbaum MS
De Paul Law Rev; 1992; 41(3):841-84. PubMed ID: 11659593
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. The Virginia Natural Death Act--a critical analysis.
Murphy JG
Univ Richmond Law Rev; 1983; 17(4):863-79. PubMed ID: 11649800
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Law at the edge of life: issues of death and dying.
Janzen PS
Hamline Law Rev; 1984 Jun; 7(2):431-62. PubMed ID: 11649814
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Mediating life and death decisions.
Hoffmann DE
Ariz Law Rev; 1994; 36(4):821-77. PubMed ID: 11656438
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Institutional ethics: hospital practices and policies for denying life-sustaining treatment.
Ross J; Wenger N
Whittier Law Rev; 1994; 15(1):33-49. PubMed ID: 11652884
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. AMA issues guidelines on end of life care.
Charatan F
BMJ; 1999 Mar; 318(7185):690. PubMed ID: 10074003
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Chicago opinion of marginal value.
Parnisari EP
Health Prog; 1988 Mar; 69(2):8, 10. PubMed ID: 11645605
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. New Jersey Advance Directives for Health Care Act.
New Jersey
N J Statut Annot N J; 1991 Jul; Chapt. 201 Sects. 26.2H.53 to 26.2H.78():26:2H-53 to 26:2H-78. PubMed ID: 12043617
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Death and life decisions: who is in control?
Kenney SC
Loyola Los Angel Law Rev; 1990 Apr; 23(3):791-828. PubMed ID: 11652584
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. The due process "right to life" in Cruzan and its impact on "right-to-die" law.
Bopp J; Avila D
Univ Pittsbg Law Rev; 1991; 53(1):193-233. PubMed ID: 11652639
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. The Hastings Center guidelines on forgoing treatment.
Mead AP
Clin Ethics Rep; 1988; 2(1):1-8. PubMed ID: 11651918
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Family surrogate laws: a necessary supplement to living wills and durable powers of attorney.
Hamann AA
Villanova Law Rev; 1993; 38(1):103-77. PubMed ID: 11654083
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
