A Dilemma for Respecting Autonomy: Bridge Technologies and the Hazards of Sequential Decision-Making

被引:14
|
作者
Kestigian, Aidan [1 ,2 ]
London, Alex John [3 ]
机构
[1] Wheaton Coll, 26 E Main St, Norton, MA 02766 USA
[2] ThinkerAnalytix, Cambridge, MA USA
[3] Carnegie Mellon Univ, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA
来源
JOURNAL OF MEDICINE AND PHILOSOPHY | 2022年 / 47卷 / 02期
关键词
advance directives; end-of-life issues; decision-making; TOTAL ARTIFICIAL-HEART; VENTRICULAR ASSIST DEVICE; PALLIATIVE MEDICINE; ADVANCE DIRECTIVES; PREVENTIVE ETHICS; CARE; TRANSPLANTATION; THERAPY;
D O I
10.1093/jmp/jhab050
中图分类号
B82 [伦理学(道德学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Respect for patient autonomy can apply at two levels: ensuring that patient care reflects their considered values and wishes and honoring patient preferences about how to make momentous decisions. Caregivers who seek to respect patient autonomy in the context of some end-of-life decisions face a dilemma. Because these decisions are fraught, patients may prefer to approach them sequentially, only making decisions at the time they arise. However, respecting patients' preferences for a sequential approach can increase the likelihood that surrogates and care teams wind up in situations in which they lack information needed to ensure patients receive care that conforms to their considered values after they are no longer competent to make decisions for themselves. Sequential decision-making can thus conflict with the goal of ensuring care reflects the wishes of patients. After illustrating how this dilemma can arise in the use of life-sustaining "bridge" technologies, we argue that care teams may be warranted in requiring patients to articulate their wishes in an advance care plan before treatment begins. In some cases, care teams may even be permitted to refuse to undertake certain courses of care, unless patients articulate their wishes in an advance care plan.
引用
收藏
页码:293 / 310
页数:18
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] A DILEMMA IN DECISION-MAKING - THE BRIEF LIFE AND DEATH OF BRIDGE,CHRISTOPHER
    BRIDGE, P
    BRIDGE, M
    HASTINGS CENTER REPORT, 1981, 11 (06) : 17 - 19
  • [2] Shared Decision-making in the Emergency Department: Respecting Patient Autonomy When Seconds Count
    Hess, Erik P.
    Grudzen, Corita R.
    Thomson, Richard
    Raja, Ali S.
    Carpenter, Christopher R.
    ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2015, 22 (07) : 856 - 864
  • [3] Guardianship and autonomy in decision-making
    Dev, Deepak
    Pinals, Debra A.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PSYCHIATRY AND THE LAW, 2008, 36 (03): : 406 - 409
  • [4] DECISION-MAKING AUTONOMY IN NURSING
    DWYER, DJ
    SCHWARTZ, RH
    FOX, ML
    JOURNAL OF NURSING ADMINISTRATION, 1992, 22 (02): : 17 - 23
  • [5] Capacity for Preferences Respecting Patients with Compromised Decision-Making
    Wasserman, Jason Adam
    Navin, Mark Christopher
    HASTINGS CENTER REPORT, 2018, 48 (03) : 31 - 39
  • [6] FALLIBILITY AND SEQUENTIAL DECISION-MAKING
    KOH, WTH
    JOURNAL OF INSTITUTIONAL AND THEORETICAL ECONOMICS-ZEITSCHRIFT FUR DIE GESAMTE STAATSWISSENSCHAFT, 1994, 150 (02): : 362 - 374
  • [7] SEQUENTIAL DECISION-MAKING - MODEL
    DECKARD, BS
    PUBLIC CHOICE, 1976, 26 : 89 - 103
  • [8] Shared decision-making and patient autonomy
    Lars Sandman
    Christian Munthe
    Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 2009, 30 : 289 - 310
  • [9] DECISION-MAKING AND AUTONOMY IN EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM
    SCHMIDT, R
    POLITISCHE STUDIEN, 1972, 23 (205) : 518 - 537
  • [10] AUTONOMY, LIBERTY, AND MEDICAL DECISION-MAKING
    Coggon, John
    Miola, Jose
    CAMBRIDGE LAW JOURNAL, 2011, 70 (03): : 523 - 547