Literature DB >> 22367526

Empirical fallacies in the debate on substituted judgment.

Mats Johansson1, Linus Broström.   

Abstract

According to the Substituted Judgment Standard a surrogate decision maker ought to make the decision that the incompetent patient would have made, had he or she been competent. This standard has received a fair amount of criticism, but the objections raised are often wide of the mark. In this article we discuss three objections based on empirical research, and explain why these do not give us reason to abandon the Substituted Judgment Standard.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 22367526     DOI: 10.1007/s10728-012-0205-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Care Anal        ISSN: 1065-3058


  9 in total

1.  Stability of elderly persons' expressed preferences regarding the use of life-sustaining treatments.

Authors:  S Carmel; E J Mutran
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 4.634

2.  Substituted judgment: the limitations of autonomy in surrogate decision making.

Authors:  Alexia M Torke; G Caleb Alexander; John Lantos
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2008-07-10       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  Living wills and substituted judgments: a critical analysis.

Authors:  J V Welie
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2001

4.  "What the patient would have decided": a fundamental problem with the substituted judgment standard.

Authors:  Linus Broström; Mats Johansson; Morten Klemme Nielsen
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2006-11-21

5.  Micromanaging death: process preferences, values, and goals in end-of-life medical decision making.

Authors:  Nikki Ayers Hawkins; Peter H Ditto; Joseph H Danks; William D Smucker
Journal:  Gerontologist       Date:  2005-02

Review 6.  The accuracy of surrogate decision makers: a systematic review.

Authors:  David I Shalowitz; Elizabeth Garrett-Mayer; David Wendler
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2006-03-13

7.  Choosing for another: beyond autonomy and best interests.

Authors:  Daniel Brudney
Journal:  Hastings Cent Rep       Date:  2009 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.683

8.  Stability of choices about life-sustaining treatments.

Authors:  M Danis; J Garrett; R Harris; D L Patrick
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1994-04-01       Impact factor: 25.391

9.  The stability of preferences for life-sustaining care among persons with AIDS in the Boston Health Study.

Authors:  J S Weissman; J S Haas; F J Fowler; C Gatsonis; M P Massagli; G R Seage; P Cleary
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1999 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.583

  9 in total
  1 in total

1.  Surrogate consent to non-beneficial research: erring on the right side when substituted judgments may be inaccurate.

Authors:  Mats Johansson; Linus Broström
Journal:  Theor Med Bioeth       Date:  2016-04
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.