PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Alan Meisel

Publications and source records attributed to Alan Meisel.

16 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2003

Quality of life and end-of-life decisionmaking.

Since 1976, when the New Jersey Supreme Court decided the Karen Ann Quinlan case (In re Quinlan, 355 A.2d 647 (NJ), 1976 cert. denied, 429 US 922, 1976), it has been apparent that the concept of quality of life is fundamental to end-of-life decisionmaking. Yet there has been a great deal of reluctance by courts--which have been the primary engine of lawmaking in end-of-life matters--to use this concept overtly.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Persistence of racial disparities in advance care plan documents among nursing home residents.

This paper analyzes the association between race and the presence of advance care plan documents (living wills, do not resuscitate (DNR) orders, and do not hospitalize (DNH) orders) in nursing home residents. We conducted secondary analysis of publicly available survey data from the 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey-Nursing Home Component, a nationally representative survey of nursing home residents in the United States. There were 3,747 participants in the survey, weighted to represent 1.56 million nursing home residents in the United States. We found that 20% of U.S. nursing home residents in 1996 had documentation of living wills, 48% had DNR orders, and 4% had DNH orders. African Americans are about one-third as likely as Caucasians to have living wills and one-fifth as likely as Caucasians to have DNR orders; Hispanics are about one-third as likely as Caucasians to have DNR orders and just as likely as Caucasians to have living wills. In conclusion, we found that the presence of advance care plans is related to race, even after controlling for health and other demographic factors. These findings call attention to an area where further research is needed to determine whether residents' (and their families') preferences are being elicited and documented.

Advance Directives↗
PubMed1992

A retrospective on Cruzan.

In 1990, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision in the Cruzan case, the first "right-to-die case" to reach that Court. Prior to the Court's decision, there was wide-spread speculation as to what it would decide and what the impact of the decision would be. Speculation about the impact of the decision intensified after it was announced, with many suggesting that it would prove to be a serious setback to the consensus about the legality of terminating life-sustaining medical treatment that had evolved in the state courts since the Karen Quinlan case ushered in the era of right-to-die litigation in 1976. This article examines a number of aspects of the legal consensus about forgoing life-sustaining treatment that emerged prior to Cruzan and discusses their viability in light both of what Cruzan did and did not decide and in light of subsequent judicial decisions in right-to-die cases. Two years after the Supreme Court's decision, it is apparent that the pre-Cruzan legal consensus is stronger than ever.

Advance Directives↗