159 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1479309)
21. The right of elderly patients to refuse life-sustaining treatment.
Annas GJ; Glantz LH
Milbank Q; 1986; 64(Suppl. 2):95-162. PubMed ID: 11649886
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. 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]
23. In re Drabick.
California. Court of Appeal, Sixth District
Wests Calif Report; 1988 Apr; 245():840-61. PubMed ID: 11648267
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. 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]
25. 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]
26. The Court's role in decisionmaking involving incompetent refusals of life-sustaining care and psychiatric medications.
Parry JW
Ment Phys Disabil Law Rep; 1990; 14(6):468-76. PubMed ID: 11659325
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. The right to death.
Dworkin R
New York Rev Books; 1991 Jan; ():14-7. PubMed ID: 11653244
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. Advance directive instruments for those with mental illness.
Winick BJ
Univ Miami Law Rev; 1996 Oct; 51(1):57-95. PubMed ID: 11660621
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Life and death after Cruzan: recent developments in right to die cases.
Elliott SJ
Healthspan; 1992; 9(7):12-6. PubMed ID: 10121439
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Someone to watch over me: medical decision-making for hopelessly ill incompetent adult patients.
Dippel DL
Akron Law Rev; 1991; 24(3-4):639-80. PubMed ID: 16144098
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. Cruzan and its sequelae: the Supreme Court decides its first "right-to-die" case.
Obade CC
J Clin Ethics; 1990; 1(3):242-4. PubMed ID: 2132019
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. 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]
33. Cruzan: it's not over, Nancy?
Shuster E
J Clin Ethics; 1990; 1(3):237-41. PubMed ID: 2132018
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. Can healthcare providers obtain judicial intervention against surrogates who demand "medically inappropriate" life support for incompetent patients?
Cantor NL
Crit Care Med; 1996 May; 24(5):883-7. PubMed ID: 8706470
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Pediatric research and the parens patriae jurisdiction in Canada and England.
Williams RS
Med Law; 1999; 18(4):525-47. PubMed ID: 10687360
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. The role of the clear and convincing standard of proof in right to die cases.
Forte DF
Issues Law Med; 1992; 8(2):183-203. PubMed ID: 1399495
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. A case for advance directives.
Heitz R
WMJ; 2007 Sep; 106(6):343-6. PubMed ID: 17970017
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. Surrogate decisions come under scrutiny.
Hosp Ethics; 1993; 9(1):8-10. PubMed ID: 10123107
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Medical treatment for older persons and persons with disabilities: 1990 developments. National Legal Center Staff.
Issues Law Med; 1991; 6(4):341-60. PubMed ID: 1828064
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. "Culture of life" politics at the bedside--the case of Terri Schiavo.
Annas GJ
N Engl J Med; 2005 Apr; 352(16):1710-5. PubMed ID: 15784657
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
