State ex rel. Swann v. Pack: Self-Endangerment and the First Amendment
1976
- 1,505Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage1,505
- Downloads885
- Abstract Views620
Artifact Description
For many years there has been some controversy over whether an individual has the right to endanger himself if his conduct threatens no direct harm to others. This issue has come up in a number of contexts including committing suicide, wearing a helmet while riding a motorcycle, engaging in endurance contests, and refusing a medically indicated blood transfusion. Recently it was raised again when the Holiness Church of God in Jesus Name in the mountains of Tennessee went to court over the right of its members to drink poison. On September 8, 1975, the Supreme Court of Tennessee handed down its decision in that case in State ex rel. Swann v. Pack enjoining the members of the sect from handling snakes or drinking poison because such activities constitute a common law public nuisance. This comment explores the debate over the validity of self-endangerment legislation and the case of State ex rel. Swann v. Pack.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know