114 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11816939)
41. Physician willingness to withhold tube feeding after Cruzan: an empirical study.
Peters PG; Ely JW; Zweig SC; Elder NC; Schneider FD
Miss Law Rev; 1992; 57():831-48. PubMed ID: 11654076
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
42. Justices find a right to die, but the majority sees need for clear proof of intent.
Greenhouse L
N Y Times Web; 1990 Jun; ():A1, A18, A19. PubMed ID: 11646758
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
43. [Advance refusal of treatment in case of loss of autonomy due to persistent brain disease].
Lauter H; Helmchen H
Nervenarzt; 2006 Sep; 77(9):1031-2, 1034-6, 1038-9. PubMed ID: 16810526
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. Medical priority of patients' wishes.
Dickens BM
Humane Med; 1991; 7(1):7-9. PubMed ID: 11651307
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
45. Pro-choice living wills.
Irwin M
Bull Med Ethics; 2004 Oct; (202):21-4. PubMed ID: 15685762
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
46. In re Edna M.F.
Wisconsin. Supreme Court
North West Rep Second Ser; 1997 Jun; 563():485-501. PubMed ID: 12041175
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. McConnell v. Beverly Enterprises-Connecticut.
Connecticut. Supreme Court
Atl Report; 1989 Jan; 553():596-609. PubMed ID: 11648272
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Court lets right-to-die ruling stand: parents at odds with husband over removing Fla. woman's feeding tube.
Roig-Franiza M
Washington Post; 2005 Jan; ():A7. PubMed ID: 15709259
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
49. The "emergent circumstances" exception to the need for consent: the Texas Supreme Court ruling in Miller v. HCA.
Paris JJ; Schreiber MD; Reardon F
J Perinatol; 2004 Jun; 24(6):337-42. PubMed ID: 15167878
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
50. [Discontinuing treatment in the intensive care unit--a case example: still a taboo?].
Eisenberg J
Pflege Z; 2009 Nov; 62(11):659-61. PubMed ID: 19960926
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
51. Advance directives and treatment withdrawal. Legal considerations.
Dewar MA
J Fla Med Assoc; 1994 Jan; 81(1):22-6. PubMed ID: 8133230
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
52. Redrafting Ohio's advance directive laws.
Martyn SR; Reagan JE; Minogue B; Dippel DL; Schimer MR; Taraszewski R
Akron Law Rev; 1992; 26(2):229-92. PubMed ID: 16506326
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
53. The Supreme Court of India on euthanasia: Too little, too late.
Bandewar SV; Chaudhuri L; Duggal L; Nagral S
Indian J Med Ethics; 2018; 3(2):91-94. PubMed ID: 29724694
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Living wills in English law.
Stern K
Palliat Med; 1993; 7(4):283-8. PubMed ID: 8261194
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Gardner; re BWV: Victorian Supreme Court makes landmark Australian ruling on tube feeding.
Ashby MA; Mendelson D
Med J Aust; 2004 Oct; 181(8):442-5. PubMed ID: 15487963
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Ethical practice in nursing: doing the right thing.
Erlen JA
Pa Nurse; 2007 Mar; 62(1):20-1. PubMed ID: 17472055
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
57. Gov. Bush's role is ended in feeding tube dispute.
Newman M
N Y Times Web; 2005 Jan; ():A21. PubMed ID: 15682546
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
58. A comprehensive look at Connecticut's living will statute.
Lieberson A
Conn Probate Law J; 1992; 7(1):49-113. PubMed ID: 11653117
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
59. [Advance directives, powers of attorney and end-of-life decisions].
Jox RJ; Borasio GD
MMW Fortschr Med; 2008 Feb; 150(7):33-4, 36. PubMed ID: 18361146
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
60. The effects of the Cruzan case on the rights of elderly clients.
Gottlich V
Clgh Rev; 1990 Nov; 24(7):663-70. PubMed ID: 11652574
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
