Prosecutors and end-of-life decision making

Archives of Internal Medicine

Volumn 159, Issue 10, 1999, Pages 1089-1095

  Meisel, Alan ^a   Jernigan, Jan C ^b   Youngner, Stuart J ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS OF CLEVELAND   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CRIMINAL LAW; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; LAW; LEGAL LIABILITY; LIVING WILL; MEDICAL LIABILITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

ARTIFICIAL FEEDING; CLINICAL APPROACH/SOURCE; DEATH AND EUTHANASIA; EMPIRICAL APPROACH; KILLING; LAW ENFORCEMENT; LAWYERS; LEGAL APPROACH; MORALITY; SURVEY; UNITED STATES; VENTILATORS;

ATTITUDE TO DEATH; DECISION MAKING; EUTHANASIA, ACTIVE; FEMALE; HUMANS; JURISPRUDENCE; LAW ENFORCEMENT; LAWYERS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; QUESTIONNAIRES; SUICIDE, ASSISTED; TERMINAL CARE; UNITED STATES; WITHHOLDING TREATMENT;

EID: 0033599958     PISSN: 00039926     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/archinte.159.10.1089     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. President's Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research. Deciding to Forego Lite-Sustaining Treatment: A Report on the Ethical, Medical, and Legal Issues in Treatment Decisions. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office; 1983.
2. Hastings Center. Guidelines on the Termination of Life-Sustaining Treatment and the Care of the Dying. Bloomington: Indiana University Press; 1987.
3. Solomon MZ, O'Donnell L, Jennings B, et al. Decisions near the end of life: professional views on life-sustaining treatments. Am J Public Health. 1993;83:14-25.
4. Meisel A. Legal myths about terminating life support. Arch Intern Med. 1991; 151:1497-1502.
5. Meisel A. The legal consensus about forgoing life-sustaining treatment: its status and its prospects. Kennedy Institute Ethics J. 1992;2:309-345.
6. Bouvia v Superior Court (Glenchur), 225 Cal Rep 297 (Ct App 1986).
7. Thor v Superior Court, 855 P2d 375 (Cal 1993).
8. State v McAfee, 385 SE2d 651 (Ga 1989).
9. McKay v Bergstedt, 801 P2d 617 (Nev 1990).
10. Satz v Perlmutter, 362 So2d 160, 163 (Fla Dist Ct App 1978).
11. Lynn J, ed. By No Extraordinary Means: The Choice to Forgo Lite-Sustaining Food and Water. Bloomington: Indiana University Press; 1986.
12. Meisel A. The Right to Die. 2nd ed. Gaithersburg, Md: Aspen Law & Business; 1999(suppl).
13. Washington v Glucksberg, 117 S Ct 2258 (1997).
14. Vacco v Quill, 117 S Ct 2293 (1997).
15. Death With Dignity Act, Ore Rev Stat 127.800 er seq (1996).
16. Northern Territory of Australia. Rights of the Terminally III Act (1995). Available at: http://www.nt.gov.au/lant/rotti/. Accessed March 4, 1999.
17. Colombian Supreme Court allows euthanasia. Agence France-Presse. June 12, 1997.
18. McIver v Krischer, 697 So 2d 97 (Fla 1997).
19. Emanuel EJ. Euthanasia: historical, ethical, and empiric perspectives. Arch Intern Med. 1994;154:1890.
20. Barber v Superior Court, 195 Cal Rep 484 (Ct App 1983).
21. Ganzini L, Lee MA, Heintz RT, Bloom JD. Attitudes of Oregon psychiatrists toward physician-assisted suicide. Am J Psychol. 1996;153:1469-1475.
22. Vital statistics. Washington Post. October 8, 1996:z05.