137 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 507055)
1. Medical paternalism and the rule of law: a reply to Dr. Relman.
Baron CH
Am J Law Med; 1979; 4(4):337-65. PubMed ID: 507055
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Medical paternalism or legal imperialism: not the only alternatives for handling Saikewicz-type cases.
Buchanan A
Am J Law Med; 1979; 5(2):97-117. PubMed ID: 507063
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Reconciling Quinlan and Saikewicz: decision making for the terminally ill incompetent.
Annas GJ
Am J Law Med; 1979; 4(4):367-96. PubMed ID: 507056
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Who speaks for incompetent patients? The case of Joseph Saikewicz.
Carroll PR
Trustee; 1978 Dec; 31(12):19, 21-2, 24. PubMed ID: 10239592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Litigating life and death.
Rhoden NK
Harv Law Rev; 1988 Dec; 102(2):375-446. PubMed ID: 10294608
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Judicial postponement of death recognition: the tragic case of Mary O'Connor.
Gindes D
Am J Law Med; 1989; 15(2-3):301-31. PubMed ID: 2513713
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The Saikewicz decision: a medical viewpoint.
Relman AS
Am J Law Med; 1978; 4(3):233-42. PubMed ID: 736045
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. More on appropriate decision making for the terminally ill incompetent patient.
Norris JA
Am J Law Med; 1979; 5(2):i-vi. PubMed ID: 507059
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. The role of judges in life/death decisions for the neurologically impaired.
Beresford HR
Ann Neurol; 1978 Nov; 4(5):463-4. PubMed ID: 736527
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. For them rather than by them.
Capron AM
Hastings Cent Rep; 1993; 23(6):30-1. PubMed ID: 8307744
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Assuring "detached but passionate investigation and decision": the role of guardians ad litem in Saikewicz-type cases.
Baron CH
Am J Law Med; 1978; 4(2):111-30. PubMed ID: 707492
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Court's guidelines on incompetent patients compromise their rights.
Connery JR
Hosp Prog; 1980 Sep; 61(9):46-9. PubMed ID: 10248004
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Decision-making with psychiatrically impaired patients. A collaborative endeavor.
Grant R; Steel EK
Psychiatr Clin North Am; 1990 Mar; 13(1):149-56. PubMed ID: 2179904
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Silent decisions: limits of consent and the terminally ill patient.
Brennan TA
Law Med Health Care; 1988; 16(3-4):204-9. PubMed ID: 3205051
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Ironies and tensions in feeding the dying.
Capron AM
Hastings Cent Rep; 1984 Oct; 14(5):32-5. PubMed ID: 6438020
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Treatment of incompetent terminally ill patients. 1. The American experience.
Thomson CJ
Med J Aust; 1982 Feb; 1(4):188-90. PubMed ID: 7078492
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. The Saikewicz precedent: what's good for an incompetent patient?
Ramsey P
Hastings Cent Rep; 1978 Dec; 8(6):36-42. PubMed ID: 152738
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Refusing treatment for incompetent patients; why Quinlan and Saikewicz cases agree on roles of guardians, physicians, judges, and ethics committees.
Annas GJ
N Y State J Med; 1980 Apr; 80(5):816-21. PubMed ID: 6930563
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Withholding of life-sustaining treatment from the terminal ill, incompetent patient: who decides? Part I.
Suber DG; Tabor WJ
JAMA; 1982 Nov; 248(18):2250-1. PubMed ID: 7131676
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
