Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Medical Paternalism And The Rule Of Law: A Reply To Dr. Relman, Charles Baron Aug 2013

Medical Paternalism And The Rule Of Law: A Reply To Dr. Relman, Charles Baron

Charles H. Baron

In this Article, Professor Baron challenges the position taken recently by Dr. Arnold Relman in this journal that the 1977 Saikewicz decision of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts was incorrect in calling for routine judicial resolution of decisions whether to provide life-prolonging treatment to terminally ill incompetent patients. First, Professor Baron argues that Dr. Relman's position that doctors should make such decisions is based upon an outmoded, paternalistic view of the doctor-patient relationship. Second, he points out the importance of guaranteeing to such decisions the special qualities of process which characterize decision making by courts and which are not …


Hastening Death: The Seven Deadly Sins Of The Status Quo, Charles Baron Aug 2013

Hastening Death: The Seven Deadly Sins Of The Status Quo, Charles Baron

Charles H. Baron

The seven deadly sins of the status quo -- inhumanity, paternalism, Utilitarianism, hypocrisy, lawlessness, injustice, and the deadly risk of error and abuse -- are seven arguments against maintaining the artificial bright-line distinction between the prohibition against assisted suicide and the allowance of patients’ right to refuse life-prolonging treatment. This article calls on courts and legislatures to follow the successful example of the Oregon Death with Dignity statute.


Medical Paternalism And The Rule Of Law: A Reply To Dr. Relman, Charles Baron Dec 1978

Medical Paternalism And The Rule Of Law: A Reply To Dr. Relman, Charles Baron

Charles H. Baron

In this Article, Professor Baron challenges the position taken recently by Dr. Arnold Relman in this journal that the 1977 Saikewicz decision of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts was incorrect in calling for routine judicial resolution of decisions whether to provide life-prolonging treatment to terminally ill incompetent patients. First, Professor Baron argues that Dr. Relman's position that doctors should make such decisions is based upon an outmoded, paternalistic view of the doctor-patient relationship. Second, he points out the importance of guaranteeing to such decisions the special qualities of process which characterize decision making by courts and which are not …