Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Assisted suicide (2)
- Due process (2)
- Euthanasia (2)
- Medical treatment (2)
- New York (2)
-
- Physician-assisted suicide (2)
- United States Supreme Court (2)
- Vacco v. Quill (2)
- Washington (2)
- Washington v. Glucksberg (2)
- Appellate Division (1)
- Article XI section 3 (1)
- Blood transfusion (1)
- Establishment of Religion (1)
- First Department (1)
- First amendment (1)
- Freedom of religion (1)
- Jehovah's witnesses (1)
- Lemon v. kurtzman (1)
- Lundman v. mckowan (1)
- New york state constitution (1)
- Religious freedom restoration act of 1993 (1)
- Robbins (1)
- Robbins v. Bright (1)
- Supreme Court (1)
- United states constitution (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Medical Jurisprudence
Physician-Assisted Suicide: The Problems Presented By The Compelling, Heartwrenching Case, Yale Kamisar
Physician-Assisted Suicide: The Problems Presented By The Compelling, Heartwrenching Case, Yale Kamisar
Articles
Now that the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld New York and Washington state laws prohibiting the aiding of another to commit suicide,2 the spotlight will shift to the state courts, the state legislatures and state referenda. And once again proponents of physician-assisted suicide (PAS) will point to a heartwrenching case, perhaps the relatively rare case where a dying person is experiencing unavoidable pain (i.e., pain that not even the most skilled palliative care experts are able to mitigate), and ask: What would you want done to you if you were in this person's shoes?
Establishment Of Religion, Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department: Robbins V. Bright
Establishment Of Religion, Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department: Robbins V. Bright
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
On The Meaning And Impact Of The Physician-Assisted Suicide Cases. (Symposium: Physician-Assisted Suicide: Facing Death After Glucksberg And Quill), Yale Kamisar
Articles
I read every newspaper article I could find on the meaning and impact of the U.S. Supreme Court's June 1997 decisions in Washington v. Glucksberg' and Vacco v. Quill.2 I came away with the impression that some proponents of physician-assisted suicide (PAS) were unable or unwilling publicly to recognize the magnitude of the setback they suffered when the Court handed down its rulings in the PAS cases.