Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||Standard theory and practice is to equate competence to make decisions regarding one’s medical treatment with the possession of certain rational capacities, including the capacity to understand and appreciate the prognosis of the available treatment options. Standard theory and practice also prefer to treat as competent patients who make treatment decisions on the basis of religious commitments, even when those commitments appear to interfere with the patients’ ability to understand the relevant information. This paper argues that such decision-makers are in fact incapacitated, but that community and societal commitments to respecting religion may nevertheless provide reasons to respect their decisions.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Linus Broström, The Substituted Judgment Standard. Studies on the Ethics of Surrogate Decision Making.
Rebecca Kukla (2005). Conscientious Autonomy: Displacing Decisions in Health Care. Hastings Center Report 35 (2):34-44.
Jeffrey Blustein (1988). Morality and Parenting: An Ethical Framework for Decisions About the Treatment of Imperiled Newborns. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 9 (1).
Rosamond Rhodes & Ian Holzman (2004). The Not Unreasonable Standard for Assessment of Surrogates and Surrogate Decisions. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 25 (4):367-386.
Jules Holroyd (forthcoming). Clarifying Capacity: Reasons and Value. In Lubomira Radoilska (ed.), Autonomy and Mental Health. Oxford University Press.
Neil Manson (2010). Why Do Patients Want Information If Not to Take Part in Decision Making? Journal of Medical Ethics 36 (12):834-837.
Arthur R. Derse (1999). Making Decisions About Life-Sustaining Medical Treatment in Patients with Dementia. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 20 (1):55-67.
Jillian Craigie (2011). Competence, Practical Rationality and What a Patient Values. Bioethics 25 (6):326-333.
Adrienne M. Martin (2007). Tales Publicly Allowed: Competence, Capacity, and Religious Belief. Hastings Center Report 37 (1):33-40.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads10 ( #114,557 of 740,099 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,960 of 740,099 )
How can I increase my downloads?