Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Book Review
  • Published:

The Right to Die

Nature Medicine volume 2, pages 96–98 (1996)Cite this article

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Isaacs, B., Gunn, J., McKecham, A., McMillan, I. & Neville, Y. The concept of pre-death. Lancet. i, 1115–1118 (1971).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Carstensen, L.L. The emerging field of behavioral gerontology. Behav Ther. 19, 259–281 (1988).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Spranca, M., Minsk, E. & Baron, J. Omission and commission in judgment and choice.J. Exp. Soc. Psych. 27, 76–105 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Asch, D.A., Hansen-Flaschen, J. & Lanken, P.N. Decisions to limit or continue life-sustaining treatment by critical care physicians in the United States: Conflicts between physicians_ practices and patients_ wishes. Am. J. Respir. Crit. CareMed. 151, 288–292 (1995).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Cook, D.J., Guyatt, G.H., Jaeschke, R. Determinants in Canadian health care workers of the decision to withdraw life support from the critically ill. JAMA 273 703–708 (1995).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Kapp, M.B. ‘Ageism’ and right to die litigation. Med. Law. 13, 69–77 (1994).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Weir, R.F. & Gostin, L. Decisions to abate life-sustaining treatment for nonautonomous patients: Ethical standards and legal liability for physicians after Cruzan. JAMA. 264 1846–1851 (1990).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Choice in Dying. Right-to-Die Legal Digest. (Choice in Dying, New York, 1994).

  9. US Dept.of Health & Human Services. Vital Statistics of the United States. US Dept. of Health and Human Services, Hyattsville. MD. (1993).

  10. US Dept. of Commerce. Statistical Abstract of the United States (113). US Government Printing Office. (1993).

  11. Christakis, N.A. & Asch, D.A. Biases in how physicians choose to withdraw life support.. Lancet. 342, 642–646 (1993).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. The SUPPORT Principal investigators. A controlled trial to improve care for seriously ill hospitalized patients: The study to understand prognoses and preferences for outcomes and risks of treatment (SUPPORT). JAMA. 274, 1591–1598 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

The Right to Die. Nat Med 2, 96–98 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1038/nm0196-96

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nm0196-96

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing