Patient autonomy, assessment of competence and surrogate decision-making: A call for reasonableness in deciding for others
Bioethics 24 (2):87-95 (2010)
Abstract
In this paper, I address some of the shortcomings of established clinical ethics centring on personal autonomy and consent and what I label the Doctrine of Respecting Personal Autonomy in Healthcare. I discuss two implications of this doctrine: 1) the practice for treating patients who are considered to have borderline decision-making competence and 2) the practice of surrogate decision-making in general. I argue that none of these practices are currently aligned with respectful treatment of vulnerable individuals. Because of ‘structural arbitrariness’ in the whole process of how we assess decision-making competence, this area is open to disrespectful treatment of people. The practice of surrogate decision- making on the basis of a single person's judgment is arguably not consistent with ethical and political requirements derived from the doctrine itself. In response to the inadequacies of the doctrine, I suggest a framework for reasonableness in surrogate decision-making which might allow practice to avoid the problems above. I conclude by suggesting an extended concept of Patient Autonomy which integrates both personal autonomy and the regulative idea of morality that is required by reasonableness in deciding for non-competent others.DOI
10.1111/j.1467-8519.2008.00672.x
My notes
Similar books and articles
Patient decision making competence: Outlines of a conceptual analysis. [REVIEW]Jos V. M. Welie & Sander P. K. Welie - 2001 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 4 (2):127-138.
The not unreasonable standard for assessment of surrogates and surrogate decisions.Rosamond Rhodes & Ian Holzman - 2004 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 25 (4):367-386.
Dementia and dignity: Towards a new method of surrogate decision making.Elysa R. Koppelman - 2002 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 27 (1):65 – 85.
Shared decision-making and patient autonomy.Lars Sandman & Christian Munthe - 2009 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 30 (4):289-310.
Patient competence and surrogate decision making.Dan Brock - 2007 - In Rosamond Rhodes, Leslie Francis & Anita Silvers (eds.), The Blackwell Guide to Medical Ethics. Blackwell. pp. 128--140.
Autonomy and dependence: Chronic physical illness and decision-making capacity.Wim J. M. Dekkers - 2001 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 4 (2):185-192.
The Substituted Judgment Standard. Studies on the Ethics of Surrogate Decision Making.Linus Broström - unknown
Criteria for patient decision making (in)competence: A review of and commentary on some empirical approaches. [REVIEW]Sander P. K. Welie - 2001 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 4 (2):139-151.
Turning failures into successes: A methodological shortcoming in empirical research on surrogate accuracy.Mats Johansson & Linus Broström - 2008 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 29 (1):17-26.
Adherence, shared decision-making and patient autonomy.Lars Sandman, Bradi B. Granger, Inger Ekman & Christian Munthe - 2012 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 15 (2):115-127.
Physician-patient relations: No more models.Greg Clarke, Robert T. Hall & Greg Rosencrance - 2004 - American Journal of Bioethics 4 (2):16 – 19.
An economic theory of patient decision-making.Douglas O. Stewart & Joseph P. DeMarco - 2005 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 2 (3):153-164.
Competence, practical rationality and what a patient values.Jillian Craigie - 2011 - Bioethics 25 (6):326-333.
Reconsidering surrogate decision making: Aristotelianism and confucianism on ideal human relations.Ruiping Fan - 2002 - Philosophy East and West 52 (3):346-372.
Analytics
Added to PP
2010-09-14
Downloads
37 (#317,535)
6 months
1 (#449,220)
2010-09-14
Downloads
37 (#317,535)
6 months
1 (#449,220)
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
The role of vulnerability in Kantian ethics.Paul Formosa - 2014 - In Catriona Mackenzie, Wendy Rogers & Susan Dodds (eds.), Vulnerability: New Essays in Ethics and Feminist Philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 88-109.
Commentary: The Problematic Proxy and the Patient’s Best Interests.David Campbell - 2014 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 23 (2):232-234.