Citation

Urofsky MI. University of Richmond law review. University of Richmond 1998; 32(2): 313-405.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1998)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

[Abstract unavailable]

Language: en

Keywords

Advance Directives; article; assisted suicide; civil rights; Civil Rights; Compassion in Dying v. State of Washington; Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health; Death and Euthanasia; ethics; Ethics; euthanasia; Euthanasia; Euthanasia, Active, Voluntary; Euthanasia, Passive; freedom; Freedom; government; government regulation; Government Regulation; history; History; History, 19th Century; History, 20th Century; human; Humans; In re Quinlan; international cooperation; International Cooperation; Internationality; jurisprudence; Jurisprudence; Legal Approach; living will; mental stress; passive euthanasia; persistent vegetative state; Persistent Vegetative State; personal autonomy; Personal Autonomy; physician; Physicians; policy; public opinion; Public Opinion; Public Policy; right to die; Right to Die; social control; Social Control, Formal; State Government; Stress, Psychological; suicide; Suicide; Suicide, Assisted; Supreme Court Decisions; Terminally Ill; terminally ill patient; treatment refusal; Treatment Refusal; United States; Vacco v. Quill; voluntary euthanasia; Washington v. Glucksberg; Wedge Argument