Is it sound public policy to let the terminally Ill access experimental medical innovations?

American Journal of Bioethics

Volumn 7, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 1-3

  Caplan, Arthur ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; CLINICAL TRIAL; EDITORIAL; ETHICS; FEMALE; HUMAN; LEGAL ASPECT; PATIENT RIGHT; PATIENT SELECTION; POLICY; TERMINALLY ILL PATIENT; UNITED STATES;

ADULT; CLINICAL TRIALS; FEMALE; HUMANS; PATIENT RIGHTS; PATIENT SELECTION; PUBLIC POLICY; TERMINALLY ILL; UNITED STATES;

EID: 34250174578     PISSN: 15265161     EISSN: 15360075     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15265160701429581     Document Type: Editorial

References (7)

1. Abigail Alliance. 2007. Available online at http://abigail-alliance.org/ (accessed March 7, 2007).
2. Abigail Alliance for Better Access to Developmental Drugs v Von Eschenbach, 445 F3d 470 (DC Cir 2006), vacated 2006 US App LEXIS 28974 (DC Cir November 21, 2006).
3. Glannon, W. 2006. Phase one oncology trials: Why the therapeutic misconception will not go away. Journal of Medical Ethics 32:252-255.
4. Jacobsen, P. J., and W. E. Parmet. 2007. A new era of unapproved drugs. Journal of the American Medical Association 297:205-208.
5. Okie, S. 2006. Access before approval - A right to take experimental drugs? New England Journal of Medicine 355:437-440.
6. Snyder, L., and A. L. Caplan. 2002. Assisted suicide: Finding common ground. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
7. State of Oregon: Death with Dignity Act. 1997. Available online at http://www.oregon.gov/DHS/ph/pas/index.shtml (accessed on March 7, 2007).