Decision making in health care: Limitations of the substituted judgement principle

Nursing Ethics

Volumn 9, Issue 5, 2002, Pages 483-493

  Bailey, Susan ^a  

^a DEAKIN UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

decision making; health care; self determination; substituted judgement

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL APPROACH; ARTICLE; CUSTODY; DECISION MAKING; ETHICS; HUMAN; LIVING WILL; MENTAL CAPACITY; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; PROFESSIONAL PATIENT RELATIONSHIP;

ANALYTICAL APPROACH; PROFESSIONAL PATIENT RELATIONSHIP;

ADVANCE DIRECTIVES; DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; MENTAL COMPETENCY; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; PROXY;

EID: 11244324993     PISSN: 09697330     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1191/0969733002ne538oa     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Degrazia D. Value theory and the best interests standard. Bioethics 1995; 9: 50-61.
2. Decisions near the end of life. JAMA 1992; 267: 2229-2233.
3. Re Quinlan, 70 NJ 10, 355 A.2d. 647, certificate denied sub non. Garger v. New Jersey, (1976) 429 US 922.
4. Superintendent of Belchertown State School v. Saikewicz 373 Mass. 728, 370 NE 2d. 417. Cited in: Wright R. Human values in health care. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1987: 108.
5. Teno JM, Hill TP, O’Connor MA. Advance care planning - priorities for ethical and empirical research. Hastings Cent Rep 1994; (special suppl, Nov-Dec): S1-S1.
6. Hardwig J. The problem of proxies with interests of their own: toward a better theory of proxy decisions. J Clin Ethics 1993; 4: 20-27.
7. Oddi LF, Cassidy VR. The message of SUPPORT: Study to Understand Prognosis and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatment. Change is long overdue. J Prof Nurs 1998; 14: 165-174.
8. Gillick M, Fried T. The limits of proxy decision making: undertreatment. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 1995; 4: 172-177.
9. Hare J, Pratt C, Nelson C. Agreement between patients and their self-selected surrogates on difficult medical decisions. Arch Intern Med 1992; 152: 1049-1054.
10. Seckler AB, Meier DE, Mulvihill M, Cammer Paris BE. Substituted judgement: how accurate are proxy predictions? Ann Intern Med 1991; 115: 92-98.
11. Lyon CM. The legal issues surrounding the care and control of those with severely challenging behaviour. Pennine Camphill Community. Available from: URL: www.pennine.org.uk/ftp/ Guidelines [Accessed 29 Jun 2002]
12. Docker C. Limitations of the best interest and substituted judgement standards. Dying in dignity. Mensa Sig News 2002; 3(1). Available from: URL: www.euthanasia.org/bi.htm [Accessed 29 Jun 2002]
13. President’s Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research. Deciding to forego life-sustaining treatment. Washington: US Government Printing Office, 1983.
14. Buchanan A, Brock D. Deciding for others: the ethics of surrogate decision making. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.
15. Wright RA. Human values in health care: the practice of ethics. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1987.
16. Schofield H, Bloch S, Herrman H, Murphy B, Nankervis J, Singh B eds. Family caregivers: disability, illness and ageing. St Leonards, NSW: Allen & Unwin in association with the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, 1998.
17. Wolgast E. Ethics of an artificial person: lost responsibility in professions and organisations. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1992.
18. Rhoden N. Litigating life and death. Harvard Law Review 1988; 102: 385-386.
19. Basile CM. Advance directives and advocacy in end-of-life decisions. Nurse Pract: Am J Primary Health Care 1998; 23(5): 44-54.