Constitutional law--can a "life advocate" impair the constitutional right to reject life-prolonging medical treatment?--In re Jobes, 210 N.J.Super. 543, 510 A.2d 133.
D002961:Civil Rights; D003657:Decision Making; D005066:Euthanasia, Passive; D005190:Family; D005610:Freedom; D006801:Humans; D007603:Jurisprudence; D007872:Legal Guardians; D008020:Life Support Care; D009515:New Jersey; D009735:Nursing Homes; D018529:Nutritional Support; D016134:Organizational Policy; D010344:Patient Advocacy; D018458:Persistent Vegetative State; D026684:Personal Autonomy; D018907:Privacy; D012297:Right to Die; D018454:Spouses; D020458:Third-Party Consent; D016312:Treatment Refusal; D028761:Withholding Treatment
Death and Euthanasia; In re Jobes; Legal Approach