Should we respect precedent autonomy in life-sustaining treatment decisions?
The recent judgement in the case of Re:M in which the Court held that it would be unlawful to withdraw artificial nutrition and hydration from a woman in a minimally conscious state raises a number of ethical issues of wide application. Central to these is the extent to which precedent autonomous de...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
BMJ Publ.
2013
|
| In: |
Journal of medical ethics
Year: 2013, Volume: 39, Issue: 9, Pages: 547-550 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
MARC
| LEADER | 00000caa a22000002 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 1816146420 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230426115742.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 220908s2013 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1136/medethics-2012-100663 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)1816146420 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)KXP1816146420 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 084 | |a 1 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Sheather, C. |e VerfasserIn |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Should we respect precedent autonomy in life-sustaining treatment decisions? |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2013 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a The recent judgement in the case of Re:M in which the Court held that it would be unlawful to withdraw artificial nutrition and hydration from a woman in a minimally conscious state raises a number of ethical issues of wide application. Central to these is the extent to which precedent autonomous decisions should be respected in the absence of a legally binding advance decision. Well-being interests can survive the loss of many of the psychological faculties that support personhood. A decision to respect precedent autonomy can contradict the well-being interests of the individual after capacity is lost. These decisions raise difficult questions about personal identity and about the threshold of evidence that is required of an earlier decision in order for it to be respected. | ||
| 601 | |a Autonomie | ||
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Journal of medical ethics |d London : BMJ Publ., 1975 |g 39(2013), 9, Seite 547-550 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)323607802 |w (DE-600)2026397-1 |w (DE-576)260773972 |x 1473-4257 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:39 |g year:2013 |g number:9 |g pages:547-550 |
| 856 | |3 Volltext |u http://www.jstor.org/stable/43283097 |x JSTOR | ||
| 856 | |u https://jme.bmj.com/content/medethics/39/9/547.full.pdf |x unpaywall |z Vermutlich kostenfreier Zugang |h publisher [open (via free pdf)] | ||
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2012-100663 |x Resolving-System |z kostenfrei |3 Volltext |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://jme.bmj.com/content/39/9/547.abstract |x Verlag |z kostenfrei |3 Volltext |
| 935 | |a mteo | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| ELC | |a 1 | ||
| ITA | |a 1 |t 1 | ||
| LOK | |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 | ||
| LOK | |0 001 4185600321 | ||
| LOK | |0 003 DE-627 | ||
| LOK | |0 004 1816146420 | ||
| LOK | |0 005 20220908053613 | ||
| LOK | |0 008 220908||||||||||||||||ger||||||| | ||
| LOK | |0 035 |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-08-03#D8AAC1820C5C6F9BCADF9280D57123A6C579793D | ||
| LOK | |0 040 |a DE-Tue135 |c DE-627 |d DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 092 |o n | ||
| LOK | |0 852 |a DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 852 1 |9 00 | ||
| LOK | |0 866 |x JSTOR#http://www.jstor.org/stable/43283097 | ||
| LOK | |0 935 |a ixzs |a ixrk |a zota | ||
| OAS | |a 1 | ||
| ORI | |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw | ||