206 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23389103)
1. The best interests of persistently vegetative patients: to die rather that to live?
Chan TK; Tipoe GL
J Med Ethics; 2014 Mar; 40(3):202-4. PubMed ID: 23389103
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Advance directives and the persistent vegetative state in Victoria: a human rights perspective.
Porter D
J Law Med; 2005 Nov; 13(2):256-70. PubMed ID: 16304765
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. "Best interests" and withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment from an adult who lacks capacity in the parens patriae jurisdiction.
Willmott L; White B; Smith MK
J Law Med; 2014 Jun; 21(4):920-41. PubMed ID: 25087370
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Moving on from bland: the evolution of the law and minimally conscious patients.
Heywood R
Med Law Rev; 2014; 22(4):548-71. PubMed ID: 24618294
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A right to die or a right to live? Discontinuing medical treatment.
McHale J
Br J Nurs; 2011 Nov 10-23; 20(20):1308-9. PubMed ID: 22068006
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The ultimate test of autonomy: should minors have a right to make decisions regarding life-sustaining treatment?
Rosato JL
Rutgers Law Rev; 1996; 49(1):1-103. PubMed ID: 11865878
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Best interest. A review of the legal principles involved: Part 2 (a).
Fullbrook S
Br J Nurs; 2007 Jun 14-27; 16(11):682-3. PubMed ID: 17577188
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A time to be born and a time to die: a pregnant woman's right to die with dignity.
Mulholland KA
Indiana Law Rev; 1987; 20(4):859-78. PubMed ID: 11652514
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Precedent autonomy should be respected in life-sustaining treatment decisions.
Hebron AL; McGee S
J Med Ethics; 2014 Oct; 40(10):714-6. PubMed ID: 24567422
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Baby doe redux? The Department of Health and Human Services and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002: a cautionary note on normative neonatal practice.
Sayeed SA
Pediatrics; 2005 Oct; 116(4):e576-85. PubMed ID: 16199687
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Hillsborough part 2: advance decisions and futile treatment.
Griffith R
Br J Nurs; 2014 Jun 26-Jul 9; 23(12):672-3. PubMed ID: 25039634
[TBL] [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. 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]
15. Medico-legal aspects of the 'right to die' legislation in Australia.
Mendelson D
Melb Univ Law Rev; 1993 Jun; 19(1):112-52. PubMed ID: 11654112
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Cruzan II: a clear and convincing travesty.
Bopp J; Avila D
Natl Univ Law Rev; 1992 Apr; 1(1):1-47. PubMed ID: 11654704
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining therapy: all systems are not yet "go".
Snider GL
Am J Respir Crit Care Med; 1995 Feb; 151(2):279-81. PubMed ID: 11654310
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. When is there a constitutional "right to die"? When is there no constitutional "right to live".
Kamisar Y
Georgia Law Rev; 1991; 25(5):1203-42. PubMed ID: 11652581
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
