A CLINICIAN??S GUIDE TO DECISION MAKING CAPACITY AND ETHICALLY SOUND MEDICAL DECISIONS

1994 ◽  
Vol 73 (3) ◽  
pp. 219-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
&NA; &NA;
2020 ◽  
pp. medethics-2020-106572
Author(s):  
Shih-Ning Then ◽  
Dominique E Martin

Where a person is unable to make medical decisions for themselves, law and practice allows others to make decisions on their behalf. This is common at the end of a person’s life where decision-making capacity is often lost. A further, and separate, decision that is often considered at the time of death (and often preceding death) is whether the person wanted to act as an organ or tissue donor. However, in some jurisdictions, the lawful decision-maker for the donation decision (the ‘donation decision-maker’) is different from the person who was granted decision-making authority for medical decisions during the person’s life. To date, little attention has been given in the literature to the ethical concerns and practical problems that arise where this shift in legal authority occurs. Such a change in decision-making authority is particularly problematic where premortem measures are suggested to maximise the chances of a successful organ donation. This paper examines this shift in decision-making authority and discusses the legal, ethical and practical implications of such frameworks.


Author(s):  
Jonathan M. Marron ◽  
Kaitlin Kyi ◽  
Paul S. Appelbaum ◽  
Allison Magnuson

Modern oncology practice is built upon the idea that a patient with cancer has the legal and ethical right to make decisions about their medical care. There are situations in which patients might no longer be fully able to make decisions on their own behalf, however, and some patients never were able to do so. In such cases, it is critical to be aware of how to determine if a patient has the ability to make medical decisions and what should be done if they do not. In this article, we examine the concept of decision-making capacity in oncology and explore situations in which patients may have altered/diminished capacity (e.g., depression, cognitive impairment, delirium, brain tumor, brain metastases, etc.) or never had decisional capacity (e.g., minor children or developmentally disabled adults). We describe fundamental principles to consider when caring for a patient with cancer who lacks decisional capacity. We then introduce strategies for capacity assessment and discuss how clinicians might navigate scenarios in which their patients could lack capacity to make decisions about their cancer care. Finally, we explore ways in which pediatric and medical oncology can learn from one another with regard to these challenging situations.


2007 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 187-196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Loretta M. Kopelman

When making decisions for adults lacking decision-making capacity and having no discernable preferences, widespread support exists for using the Best Interests Standard. For example, the President's Council on Bioethics supports this view in its publication, Taking Care: Ethical Caregiving in Our Aging Society. The President's Council maintains that decision-makers should seek the best available care for incapacitated adults, yet clarifies the best care does not always extend biological life for the longest time and advocates careful attention to comfort care and pain control. Their recommendations for making medical decisions for incapacitated adults match guidelines by American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) committees and by the U.K’.s Nuffield Council on Bioethics report for making medical decisions for children and infants.For reasons of consistency, fairness, and compassion, this guidance should be applied to all people lacking decision-making capacity. Uniform guidelines, however, would be incompatible with a policy for infants based on the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) amendments, widely known as the “Baby Doe” Rules.


2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 173-177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giles Newton-Howes ◽  
Neil Pickering ◽  
Greg Young

Because autonomy is regarded as central to modern bioethics; there is a considerable focus on the criteria by which autonomy may be judged. The most significant criterion used in day-to-day practice is decision-making capacity. A person who is decision-making capacitous is regarded as autonomous ipso facto. This rarely considered background analysis places a great deal of weight on the notion of decision-making capacity and how this is assessed. A person who is deemed to lack autonomy will be treated differently to a person who is deemed to have autonomy, at least when it comes to some medical decisions. In this paper we consider how extending the standard approach to decision-making capacity may deliver a more authentic reflection of autonomy. We refer to this as the ‘authentic approach’, to highlight its difference. The ethical advantages of extending the standard approach authentically in hard medical cases is analysed using a case, with recommendations about application described.


2020 ◽  
Vol 86 (11) ◽  
pp. 1450-1455
Author(s):  
Emily B. Rivet ◽  
Candace E. Blades ◽  
Mary Hutson ◽  
Danielle Noreika

Advance Care Planning (ACP) includes anticipating future medical decisions and designating a medical decision maker in the event of losing the capacity to make one’s own medical decisions. Many advantages can be seen to doing ACP before a crisis as well as revisiting these discussions over time as circumstances change. This case presentation is of a 74-year-old woman with multiple medical problems who had ACP discussions in the context of proposed surgery for colon cancer. These conversations highlight the elements of high-quality ACP and the importance of learning what patients mean when they employ phrases commonly referenced in these conversations. The planned surgery was delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic but the discussions helped to guide decision-making when the patient became critically ill with COVID-19.


2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (9) ◽  
pp. 1227-1234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyejin Kim ◽  
Mi-Kyung Song

Background: Adults who lack decision-making capacity and a surrogate (“unbefriended” adults) are a vulnerable, voiceless population in health care. But little is known about this population, including how medical decisions are made for these individuals. Objective: This integrative review was to examine what is known about unbefriended adults and identify gaps in the literature. Methods: Six electronic databases were searched using 4 keywords: “unbefriended,” “unrepresented patients,” “adult orphans,” and “incapacitated patients without surrogates.” After screening, the final sample included 10 data-based articles for synthesis. Results: Main findings include the following: (1) various terms were used to refer to adults who lack decision-making capacity and a surrogate; (2) the number of unbefriended adults was sizable and likely to grow; (3) approaches to medical decision-making for this population in health-care settings varied; and (4) professional guidelines and laws to address the issues related to this population were inconsistent. There have been no studies regarding the quality of medical decision-making and its outcomes for this population or societal impact. Conclusion: Extremely limited empirical data exist on unbefriended adults to develop strategies to improve how medical decisions are made for this population. There is an urgent need for research to examine the quality of medical decision-making and its outcomes for this vulnerable population.


2015 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 140-145
Author(s):  
Kevin R. Patterson

Decision-making capacity is a fundamental consideration in working with patients in a clinical setting. One of the most common conditions affecting decision-making capacity in patients in the inpatient or long-term care setting is a form of acute, transient cognitive change known as delirium. A thorough understanding of delirium — how it can present, its predisposing and precipitating factors, and how it can be managed — will improve a speech-language pathologist's (SLPs) ability to make treatment recommendations, and to advise the treatment team on issues related to communication and patient autonomy.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 2050313X2110270
Author(s):  
Ruth Maxwell ◽  
Michelle O’Brien ◽  
Deirdre O’Donnell ◽  
Lauren Christophers ◽  
Thilo Kroll

Formal assessments of cognition that rely on language may conceal the non-linguistic cognitive function of people with aphasia. This may have detrimental consequences for how people with aphasia are supported to reveal communicative and decision-making competence. This case report demonstrates a multidisciplinary team approach to supporting the health and social care decision-making of people with aphasia. The case is a 67-year-old woman with Wernicke’s type aphasia. As the issue of long-term care arose, the speech and language therapist used a supported communication approach with the patient who expressed her wish to go home. A multidisciplinary team functional assessment of capacity was undertaken which involved functional assessments and observations of everyday tasks by allied health, nursing, catering and medical staff. In this way, the patient’s decision-making capacity was revealed and she was discharged home. A collaborative multidisciplinary team approach using supported communication and functional capacity assessments may be essential for scaffolding the decision-making capacity of people with aphasia.


2021 ◽  
Vol 164 (3-4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexa L. Wood ◽  
Louie Rivers ◽  
Amadou Sidbé ◽  
Arika Ligmann-Zielinska

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document