The Intimate Responsibility of Surrogate Decision-Making

Daniel Brudney's clear-headed analysis, in this issue of the Hastings Center Report, of the difference between a patient's and a surrogate's right to make medical treatment decisions contributes to a longstanding conversation in bioethics. Brudney offers an epistemological and a moral...

Полное описание

Сохранить в:  
Библиографические подробности
Главный автор: Lindemann, Hilde (Автор)
Формат: Электронный ресурс Статья
Язык:Английский
Проверить наличие: HBZ Gateway
Interlibrary Loan:Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany)
Опубликовано: 2018
В: The Hastings Center report
Год: 2018, Том: 48, Выпуск: 1, Страницы: 41-42
Online-ссылка: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002c 4500
001 1937530671
003 DE-627
005 20251002055616.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 251002s2018 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1002/hast.810  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1937530671 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1937530671 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Lindemann, Hilde  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 4 |a The Intimate Responsibility of Surrogate Decision-Making 
264 1 |c 2018 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Daniel Brudney's clear-headed analysis, in this issue of the Hastings Center Report, of the difference between a patient's and a surrogate's right to make medical treatment decisions contributes to a longstanding conversation in bioethics. Brudney offers an epistemological and a moral argument for the patient's and the surrogate's right to decide. The epistemological argument is the same for both parties: the (competent) patient has a right to decide because she is presumed to know her own interests better than anyone else, and the surrogate is entitled to make decisions because she knows the patient better than anyone else. However, argues Brudney, the moral arguments are not parallel. The patient's moral right to decide for herself is an exercise of autonomy, but the only ground for the responsibility held by the surrogate, says Brudney, is that she knows the patient better than the health care professionals do. If in fact that's not the case, then she forfeits her right to be the patient's surrogate. For all the clarity and force of his argument, I think Brudney may be barking up the wrong tree. In cases of proxy decision-making, it's intimacy, not knowledge, that does the heavy moral lifting. 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |a Hastings Center  |t The Hastings Center report  |d Malden, Mass. : Wiley, 1971  |g 48(2018), 1, Seite 41-42  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)341346551  |w (DE-600)2067369-3  |w (DE-576)258761822  |x 1552-146X  |7 nnas 
773 1 8 |g volume:48  |g year:2018  |g number:1  |g pages:41-42 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.810  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/hast.810  |x Verlag  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
912 |a NOMM 
935 |a mteo 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4779656850 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1937530671 
LOK |0 005 20251002055616 
LOK |0 008 251002||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2025-09-26#C58AED90792BE483070021C4D0FF76D97F3A04F7 
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 |0 935   |a ixrk  |a ixzs  |a zota  |a tiep 
ORI |a TA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw