405 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11659201)
1. Right-to-die damage actions: developments in the law.
Miller DH
Denver Univ Law Rev; 1988; 65(2-3):181-212. PubMed ID: 11659201
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Damage actions for nonconsensual life-sustaining medical treatment.
Dooling RP
St Louis Univ Law J; 1986; 30(3):895-918. PubMed ID: 11649881
[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. 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]
6. 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]
7. The life support cases: myths and realities.
Hartz JN
Los Angel Lawyer; 1982; 5(5):18-20, 33, 52+. PubMed ID: 11653530
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. John F. Kennedy Memorial Hospital, Inc. v. Bludworth.
Paulus SM
Issues Law Med; 1985 Sep; 1(2):163-6. PubMed ID: 11643875
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Living will statutes: the first decade.
Gelfand G
Wis L Rev; 1987; 5(5):737-822. PubMed ID: 11650367
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Euthanasia, the right to die and privacy: observations on some recent cases.
Riga PJ
Linc Law Rev; 1980; 11(2):109-65. PubMed ID: 11658630
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. "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]
12. Therefore, choose death.
Brown ML
Human Rights; 1982; 10(3):38-45. PubMed ID: 11651709
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Withholding life-prolonging medical treatment from the institutionalized person--who decides?
Corbett KA; Raciti RM
New Engl J Prison Law; 1976; 3(1):47-83. PubMed ID: 11664738
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. 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]
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. 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]
18. 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]
19. The best interests of incompetent patients: the capacity for interpersonal relationships as a standard for decisionmaking.
Quinn KP
Calif Law Rev; 1988 Jul; 76(4):897-937. PubMed ID: 11650115
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
