394 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11656535)
1. The roles of the family in making health care decisions for incompetent patients.
Francis LP
Utah Law Rev; 1992; 1992(3):861-90. PubMed ID: 11656535
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Medicine and human rights: emerging substantive standards and procedural protections for medical decision making within the American family.
Baron CH
Fam Law Q; 1983; 17(1):1-40. PubMed ID: 11658459
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Missing persons: legal perceptions of incompetent patients.
Dresser R
Rutgers Law Rev; 1994; 46(2):609-719. PubMed ID: 11660406
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Constitutional development of judicial criteria in right-to-die cases: from brain dead to persistent vegetative state.
Morgan R; Harty-Golder B
Wake Forest Law Rev; 1988; 23(4):721-65. PubMed ID: 11652556
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Refusal of life-sustaining treatment for terminally ill incompetent patients: court orders and an alternative.
Rubin BL
Columbia J Law Soc Probl; 1985; 19(1):19-68. PubMed ID: 11658755
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Life, death, and incompetent patients: conceptual infirmities and hidden values in the law.
Dresser R
Ariz Law Rev; 1986; 28(3):373-405. PubMed ID: 11652552
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Human rights and human life: an uneven fit.
Patterson EG
Tulane Law Rev; 1994 Jun; 68(6):1527-61. PubMed ID: 11656638
[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. 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]
13. "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]
14. 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]
15. When should the state step aside? Terminating treatment for PVS victims.
Harvey JC; Quinn KP; Johnson SH
Commonweal; 1990 May; 117(9):286-94. PubMed ID: 11652558
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. The outer limits of parental autonomy: withholding medical treatment from children.
Vorys YV
Ohio State Law J; 1981; 43(3):813-29. PubMed ID: 11658709
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Medical decisions concerning noncompetent patients.
Momeyer RW
Theor Med; 1983 Oct; 4(3):275-90. PubMed ID: 11649532
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Medical decision making for and by children: tensions between parent, state, and child.
Wadlington W
Univ Ill Law Rev; 1994; 2():311-36. PubMed ID: 11659988
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Louisiana's Natural Death Act and dilemmas in medical ethics.
Vitiello M
LA Law Rev; 1985; 46(2):259-309. PubMed ID: 11649843
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
