Cited by 33Ethics and bioethics in healthcareMedical and Health Sciences ResearchPalliative and Oncologic Care

A woman’s choice? The gendered risks of voluntary euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide

George, K.·2007·Medical Law Review

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/medlaw/fwl017

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
George, K.
Affiliations
Western Sydney University (AU)
Corresponding author
George, K.
Venue
Medical Law Review
Published
2007-01-10
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
1-33
ISSN
  • 0967-0742 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-3790
OpenAlex
W2053609417
Cited by
32
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 6 · 2024: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Medical Law Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Medical and Health Sciences Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
Keywords
voluntary euthanasia, physician-assisted suicide, gender, women, gendered risk, assisted dying, medical ethics
MeSH terms
Altruism, Decision Making, Female, Humans, Male, Netherlands, Oregon, Prejudice, Sex Factors, Violence, Women's Rights, Caregivers, Suicide, Assisted, Feminism, Personal Autonomy, Euthanasia, Active, Voluntary

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review