334 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11659478)
1. The due process of dying.
Flick MR
Calif Law Rev; 1991 Jul; 79(4):1161-7. PubMed ID: 11659478
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Beyond theological conflict in the courts: the issue of assisted suicide.
Dyck AJ
Notre Dame J Law Ethics Public Policy; 1995; 9(2):503-35. PubMed ID: 11653003
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Cruzan v. Harmon and the dangerous claim that others can exercise an incapacitated patient's right to die.
Ellman IM
Jurimetrics; 1989; 29(4):389-401. PubMed ID: 11652559
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Cruzan and its impact on patient self-determination.
Gilbert LJ
J Fam Law; 1991-1992; 30(1):111-33. PubMed ID: 11659441
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Perspectives on Cruzan: the sirens' lure of invented consent -- a critique of autonomy-based surrogate decisionmaking for legally-incapacitated older persons.
Bopp J; Avila D
Hastings Law J; 1991 Mar; 42(3):779-815. PubMed ID: 11652587
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Therefore choose death?
Appelbaum PS; Klein JI
Commentary; 1986 Apr; 81(4):23-9. PubMed ID: 11658682
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Letting patients die: legal and moral reflections.
Kadish SH
Calif Law Rev; 1992 Jul; 80(4):857-88. PubMed ID: 11652646
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. People with pipes: a question of euthanasia.
Machler S
Univ Puget Sound Law Rev; 1993; 16(2):781-832. PubMed ID: 11659755
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Surrogate consent.
Richards N
Public Aff Q; 1992 Apr; 6(2):227-43. PubMed ID: 11652630
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Medical decisionmaking for incompetent persons: the Massachusetts substituted judgment model.
Dunphy SM; Cross JH
West New Engl Law Rev; 1987; 9(1):153-67. PubMed ID: 11649910
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. The killing words? How the new quality-of-life ethic affects people with severe disabilities.
HarveyParedes T
SMU Law Rev; 1992; 46(3):805-40. PubMed ID: 11659757
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Suicidal competence and the patient's right to refuse lifesaving treatment.
Matthews MA
Calif Law Rev; 1987 Mar; 75(2):707-58. PubMed ID: 11652518
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Constituting family and death through the struggle with state power: Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health.
Ronzetti TA
Univ Miami Law Rev; 1991 Sep; 46(1):149-204. PubMed ID: 11652668
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Beyond misguided paternalism: resuscitating the right to refuse medical treatment.
Malloy SE
Wake Forest Law Rev; 1998; 33():1035-91. PubMed ID: 11660805
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. The right to death.
Dworkin R
New York Rev Books; 1991 Jan; ():14-7. PubMed ID: 11653244
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. USCC brief in Nancy Cruzan case: continued nutrition and hydration urged.
United States Catholic Conference
Origins; 1989 Oct; 19(21):345-51. PubMed ID: 11652554
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. The assault on privacy in healthcare decisionmaking.
Rich BA
Denver Univ Law Rev; 1991; 68(1):1-55. PubMed ID: 11651237
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
