David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Bioethics 24 (3):105-112 (2010)
This article explores universal normative bases that could help to shape a workable legal construct that would facilitate a global use of advance directives. Although I believe that advance directives are of universal character, my primary aim in approaching this issue is to remain realistic. I will make three claims. First, I will argue that the principles of autonomy, dignity and informed consent, embodied in the Oviedo Convention and the UNESCO Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights, could arguably be regarded as universal bases for the global use of advance directives. Second, I will demonstrate that, despite the apparent consensus of ethical authorities in support of their global use, it is unlikely, for the time being, that such consensus could lead to unqualified legal recognition of advance directives, because of different understandings of the nature of the international rules, meanings of autonomy and dignity which are context-specific and culture-specific, and existing imperfections that make advance directives either unworkable or hardly applicable in practice. The third claim suggests that the fact that the concept of the advance directive is not universally shared does not mean that it should not become so, but never as the only option in managing incompetent patients. A way to proceed is to prioritize work on developing higher standards in managing incompetent patients and on progressing towards the realization of universal human rights in the sphere of bioethics, by advocating a universal, legally binding international convention that would outlaw human rights violations in end-of-life decision-making.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
E. Furberg (2012). Advance Directives and Personal Identity: What Is the Problem? Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 37 (1):60-73.
David J. Doukas, Toni Antonucci & Daniel W. Gorenflo (1992). A Multigenerational Study on the Correlation of Values and Advance Directives. Ethics and Behavior 2 (1):51 – 59.
David J. Doukas, Using the Family Covenant in Planning End-of-Life Care: Obligations and Promises of Patients, Families, and Physicians.
David Shaw (2011). A Direct Advance on Advance Directives. Bioethics 26 (5):267-274.
Stefania Negri (ed.) (2012). Self-Determination, Dignity and End-of-Life Care: Regulating Advance Directives in International and Comparative Perspective. M. Nijhoff Pub..
Jim Stone (1994). Advance Directives, Autonomy and Unintended Death. Bioethics 8 (3):223–246.
J. Vollmann (2001). Advance Directives in Patients with Alzheimer's Disease; Ethical and Clinical Considerations. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 4 (2):161-167.
Miguel A. Sanchez-Conzalez (1997). Advance Directives Outside the USA: Are They the Best Solution Everywhere? Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 18 (3):283-301.
Leslie Pickering Francis (1993). Advance Directives for Voluntary Euthanasia: A Volatile Combination? Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 18 (3):297-322.
Added to index2010-02-02
Total downloads45 ( #90,688 of 1,793,075 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #463,661 of 1,793,075 )
How can I increase my downloads?