Personal Identity and the Moral Authority of Advance Directives

The Pluralist ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 38-54
Author(s):  
Andrea Ott
2018 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 249-256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Govind Persad

This paper takes a novel approach to the active bioethical debate over whether advance medical directives have moral authority in dementia cases. Many have assumed that advance directives would lack moral authority if dementia truly produced a complete discontinuity in personal identity, such that the predementia individual is a separate individual from the postdementia individual. I argue that even if dementia were to undermine personal identity, the continuity of the body and the predementia individual’s rights over that body can support the moral authority of advance directives. I propose that the predementia individual retains posthumous rights over her body that she acquired through historical embodiment in that body, and further argue that claims grounded in historical embodiment can sometimes override or exclude moral claims grounded in current embodiment. I close by considering how advance directives grounded in historical embodiment might be employed in practice and what they would and would not justify.


1999 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Blustein

Philosophically, the most interesting objection to the reliance on advance directives to guide treatment decisions for formerly competent patients is the argument from the loss of personal identity. Starting with a psychological continuity theory of personal identity, the argument concludes that the very conditions that bring an advance directive into play may destroy the conditions necessary for personal identity, and so undercut the authority of the directive. In this article, I concede that if the purpose of a theory of personal identity is to provide an answer to the question What is it for a person to persist over time?, then reflection on personal identity poses a potentially serious threat to the moral authority of advance directives. However, as Marya Schechtman observes, questions about how a single person persists through change are not what most of us are interested in when we think about who a person is. Rather, we are interested in what it means to say that a particular set of actions, experiences, and characteristics is that of a given person rather than someone else.


2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 675-685
Author(s):  
ORSOLYA FRIEDRICH ◽  
ANDREAS WOLKENSTEIN ◽  
RALF J. JOX ◽  
NIEK ROGGER ◽  
CLAUDIA BOZZARO

Abstract:Some authors have questioned the moral authority of advance directives (ADs) in cases in which it is not clear if the author of the AD is identical to the person to whom it later applies. This article focuses on the question of whether the latest results of neuroimaging studies have moral significance with regard to the moral authority of ADs in patients with disorders of consciousness (DOCs). Some neuroimaging findings could provide novel insights into the question of whether patients with DOCs exhibit sufficient psychological continuity to be ascribed diachronic personal identity. If those studies were to indicate that psychological continuity is present, they could justify the moral authority of ADs in patients with DOCs. This holds at least if respect for self-determination is considered as the foundation for the moral authority of ADs. The non-identity thesis in DOCs could no longer be applied, in line with clinical and social practice.


2002 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-72
Author(s):  
Michael F. Patton, ◽  

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Mazor

This article considers the question of why labor income may be permissibly redistributed to the poor even though non-essential body parts should generally be protected from redistribution to the infirm – the body-income puzzle.  It argues that proposed solutions that affirm self-ownership but reject ownership of labor income are unsuccessful.  And proposed solutions that grant individuals entitlements to resources based on the centrality of those resources to the individual’s personal identity are also unsuccessful.  Instead, this article defends a solution to the body-income puzzle based on a novel conception of respect for the separateness of persons.  This conception holds that the sphere of moral authority protected from interference by respect for the separateness of persons includes both the body and labor income.  And the strength of the negative rights constituting this sphere vary based on these rights' importance to the personal identity of the right-holder.  It is shown that a commitment to helping the disadvantaged tempered by this conception of respect for the separateness of persons can solve the body-income puzzle.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document