The Charlie Gard case: British and American approaches to court resolution of disputes over medical decisions.
作者信息
Paris J J, Ahluwalia J, Cummings B M, Moreland M P, Wilkinson D J
机构信息
Department of Bioethics, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA, USA.
Campion Hall, Oxford University, Oxford, UK.
出版信息
J Perinatol. 2017 Dec;37(12):1268-1271. doi: 10.1038/jp.2017.138. Epub 2017 Oct 19.
Abstract
摘要
相似文献
1
The Charlie Gard case: British and American approaches to court resolution of disputes over medical decisions.查理·加德案：英美两国通过法院解决医疗决策纠纷的方式。
J Perinatol. 2017 Dec;37(12):1268-1271. doi: 10.1038/jp.2017.138. Epub 2017 Oct 19.
2
Hard lessons: learning from the Charlie Gard case.沉痛教训：从查理·加德案中吸取教训。
J Med Ethics. 2018 Jul;44(7):438-442. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2017-104492. Epub 2017 Aug 2.
3
Approaches to parental demand for non-established medical treatment: reflections on the Charlie Gard case.寻求非已确立医疗方法的父母：查理·盖德案的反思。
J Med Ethics. 2018 Jul;44(7):443-447. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2018-104902. Epub 2018 May 18.
4
Observations on the case of Charlie Gard.关于查理·加德一案的观察
Arch Dis Child. 2018 May;103(5):409-410. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2017-314373. Epub 2018 Jan 30.
5
Guest editorial: Charlie Gard's five months in court: better dispute resolution mechanisms for medical futility disputes.客座社论：查理·加德的五个月庭审：完善医疗无效纠纷的争议解决机制
J Med Ethics. 2018 Jul;44(7):436-437. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2018-104744.
6
Conjoined twins: the conflict between parents and the courts over the medical treatment of children.
Denver J Int Law Policy. 2002 Summer;30(4):458-75.
7
Collective decisions about medical futility.
J Law Med Ethics. 1994 Summer;22(2):152-60, discussion 161-2. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-720x.1994.tb01289.x.
8
The Charlie Gard Case, and the Ethics of Obstructing International Transfer of Seriously Ill Children.查理·加德案与阻挠重病儿童国际转移的伦理道德
Pediatrics. 2020 Aug;146(Suppl 1):S54-S59. doi: 10.1542/peds.2020-0818K.
9
Wrongful suits? Suing in the name of Terri Schiavo and Kelly Molenaar.
Eur J Health Law. 2005 Jun;12(2):97-102. doi: 10.1163/1571809054640677.
10
A "terrible beauty", the Irish Supreme Court, and dying.
Eur J Health Law. 1996 Mar;3(1):29-48. doi: 10.1007/BF02789866.
引用本文的文献
1
Understanding Experiences of Moral Distress in End-of-Life Care Among US and UK Physician Trainees: a Comparative Qualitative Study.理解美国和英国住院医师在临终关怀中道德困境的体验：一项比较定性研究。
J Gen Intern Med. 2021 Jul;36(7):1890-1897. doi: 10.1007/s11606-020-06314-y. Epub 2020 Oct 27.
2
A review of approaches for resolving disputes between physicians and families on end-of-life care for newborns.关于解决医生与家庭在新生儿临终关怀方面争议的方法综述。
J Perinatol. 2020 Sep;40(9):1441-1445. doi: 10.1038/s41372-020-0675-4. Epub 2020 May 11.
3
Approaches to parental demand for non-established medical treatment: reflections on the Charlie Gard case.寻求非已确立医疗方法的父母：查理·盖德案的反思。
J Med Ethics. 2018 Jul;44(7):443-447. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2018-104902. Epub 2018 May 18.
本文引用的文献
1
Beyond resources: denying parental requests for futile treatment.超越资源范畴：拒绝家长对无效治疗的请求。
Lancet. 2017 May 13;389(10082):1866-1867. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31205-9. Epub 2017 May 4.
2
Reason-Giving and Medical Futility: Contrasting Legal and Social Discourse in the United States With the United Kingdom and Ontario, Canada.说理与医疗无效：美国与英国和加拿大安大略省的法律和社会话语对比。
Chest. 2016 Sep;150(3):714-21. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2016.05.026. Epub 2016 Jun 11.
3
Forty years of work on end-of-life care--from patients' rights to systemic reform.四十年临终关怀工作——从患者权利到系统性改革。
N Engl J Med. 2015 Feb 12;372(7):678-82. doi: 10.1056/NEJMms1410321.
4
"Brain death," "dead," and parental denial - the case of Jahi McMath.“脑死亡”、“死亡”与父母的否认——贾希·麦克马思事件
Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2014 Oct;23(4):371-82. doi: 10.1017/S0963180114000048. Epub 2014 Jul 17.
5
Tackling medical futility in Texas.应对德克萨斯州的医疗无效问题。
N Engl J Med. 2007 Jul 5;357(1):1-3. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp078109.
6
Noninitiation or withdrawal of intensive care for high-risk newborns.高危新生儿重症监护的不启动或撤离
Pediatrics. 2007 Feb;119(2):401-3. doi: 10.1542/peds.2006-3180.
7
Minimal risk as an international ethical standard in research.作为研究中的一项国际伦理标准的最小风险。
J Med Philos. 2004 Jun;29(3):351-78. doi: 10.1080/03605310490500545.
8
Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for a neurologically devastated child: whose decision is it?对一名神经功能严重受损儿童进行高压氧治疗：该由谁来做决定？
J Perinatol. 2003 Apr-May;23(3):250-3. doi: 10.1038/sj.jp.7210889.
9
Progress and problems with the use of viral vectors for gene therapy.用于基因治疗的病毒载体的进展与问题
Nat Rev Genet. 2003 May;4(5):346-58. doi: 10.1038/nrg1066.
10
Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health.克鲁赞诉密苏里州卫生部主任案
Wests Supreme Court Report. 1990 Jun 25;110:2841-92.
Zotero 插件