These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
113 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8334281)
21. Response to "Ethics and drug infants" by Michelle Oberman (CQ vol. 6, no. 2). Jain R; Thomasma DC; Ragas R Camb Q Healthc Ethics; 1998; 7(1):94-6. PubMed ID: 9523046 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
22. Still troubled. In re Martin. Dresser R Hastings Cent Rep; 1996; 26(4):21-2. PubMed ID: 8854116 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. Medical futility and implications for physician autonomy. Daar JF Am J Law Med; 1995; 21(2-3):221-40. PubMed ID: 8571976 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. Who's to choose? Surrogate decisionmaking in New York State. Moreno JD Hastings Cent Rep; 1993; 23(1):5-11. PubMed ID: 8436493 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. End-of-life decision making: when patients and surrogates disagree. Terry PB; Vettese M; Song J; Forman J; Haller KB; Miller DJ; Stallings R; Sulmasy DP J Clin Ethics; 1999; 10(4):286-93. PubMed ID: 10791278 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. Who plays what role in decisions about withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment? Reckling JB J Clin Ethics; 1997; 8(1):39-45. PubMed ID: 9130107 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. Erring too far on the side of life: deja vu all over again in the Schiavo saga. Allen W Stetson Law Rev; 2005; 35(1):123-45. PubMed ID: 17099996 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. Should it be mandated that an HEC review a physician's decision not to honor a patient's or surrogate's refusal of treatment? DeRenzo EG; Olick RS HEC Forum; 2000 Jun; 12(2):161-5. PubMed ID: 11066195 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Dynamic complementarity: Terri's law and separation of powers principles in the end-of-life context. Snead OC Fla Law Rev; 2005 Jan; 57(1):53-89. PubMed ID: 17153246 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Withdrawal of treatment for minors in a persistent vegetative state: parents should decide. Massie AM Ariz Law Rev; 1993; 35(1):173-218. PubMed ID: 12645558 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. Talking to patients about end-of-life care. Whisnant R Minn Med; 2004 Jan; 87(1):8. PubMed ID: 14977261 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. The law of patient care in Massachusetts. Broad M Mass Law Rev; 1983; 68(1):10-16, 18-20. PubMed ID: 11658444 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. The hermeneutical process and clinical ethics. Potter RL J Clin Ethics; 1995; 6(1):88-91. PubMed ID: 7633005 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. The role of the judge in medical treatment decisions. Hancock SF Albany Law Rev; 1994; 57(3):647-54. PubMed ID: 11652858 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. Debating euthanasia in Belgium: part two. Schotsmans P; Broeckaert B Hastings Cent Rep; 1999; 29(5):47-8. PubMed ID: 11645207 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. Patient choice, cost, and survival of critically ill cancer patients: a societal dilemma. Markman M J Cancer Res Clin Oncol; 1993; 120(1-2):3-4. PubMed ID: 8270605 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. The limits of proxy decision making: undertreatment. Gillick MR; Fried T Camb Q Healthc Ethics; 1995; 4(2):172-7. PubMed ID: 7655668 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. Patient self-determination and the artificial prolongation of life. Osman H; Perlin TM Health Soc Work; 1994 Nov; 19(4):245-52. PubMed ID: 7813962 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]