647 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11654615)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. Therefore, choose death.
Brown ML
Human Rights; 1982; 10(3):38-45. PubMed ID: 11651709
[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. 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]
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. Rasmussen v. Fleming.
Pollard CT
Issues Law Med; 1987; 3(3):297-310. PubMed ID: 11644117
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Deciding for the incompetent patient: identifying the role of family members.
Healey JM
Conn Med; 1984 Oct; 48(10):687. PubMed ID: 11644167
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. Protecting the right to die: the Patient Self-Determination Act of 1990.
Mulholland KC
Harvard J Legis; 1991; 28(2):609-30. PubMed ID: 11651225
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Decisionmaking in authorizing and withholding life sustaining medical treatment: from Quinlan to Cruzan.
Keilitz I; Bilzor JC; Hafemeister TL; Brown V; Dudyshyn D
Ment Phys Disabil Law Rep; 1989; 13(5):482-93. PubMed ID: 11654759
[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. Life-support withdrawal: law of commiseration or principle?
Byrnes JC
Md J Contemp Leg Issues; 1991; 2(2):331-54. PubMed ID: 11651213
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Refusing life-sustaining treatment for incompetent patients: mere existence or a quality life?
Cerminara KL
Med Trial Tech Q; 1988; 35(2):121-45. PubMed ID: 11652537
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. "Right to die" cases: a model for judicial decision-making?
Webster WL
N Y Law School Hum Rights Annu; 1990; 7(2):140-56. PubMed ID: 11652592
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Delio v. Westchester County Medical Center.
Kirkpatrick GA
Issues Law Med; 1988; 4(2):215-23. PubMed ID: 11644323
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Someone make up my mind: the troubling right to die issues presented by incompetent patients with no prior expression of a treatment preference.
Richard SM
Notre Dame Law Rev; 1989; 64(3):394-421. PubMed ID: 11659243
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. The role of the family in medical decisionmaking for incompetent adult patients: a historical perspective and case analysis.
Krasik EB
Univ Pittsbg Law Rev; 1987; 48(2):539-618. PubMed ID: 11658944
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
