Advance Directives: The Principle of Determining Authenticity
In medical ethics, there is a well-established debate about the authority of advance directives over people living with dementia, a dispute often cast as a clash between two principles: respecting autonomy and beneficence toward patients. In this article, I argue that there need be only one principl...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
2022
|
| In: |
The Hastings Center report
Year: 2022, Volume: 52, Issue: 1, Pages: 32-41 |
| Further subjects: | B
Domination
B Authenticity B substitute decision-making B clinical ethics B Advance Directives B Dementia |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | In medical ethics, there is a well-established debate about the authority of advance directives over people living with dementia, a dispute often cast as a clash between two principles: respecting autonomy and beneficence toward patients. In this article, I argue that there need be only one principle in substitute decision-making: determining authenticity. This principle favors a substituted judgment standard in all cases and instructs decision-makers to determine what the patient would authentically prefer to happen—based not merely on the patient’s decisions but also on their present settled dispositions. Adhering to this principle entails that, in a significant range of cases, an advance directive can (and indeed ought to) be overruled. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1552-146X |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Hastings Center, The Hastings Center report
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1002/hast.1338 |