 |
|
Proxy Decision Making for Incompetent PatientsAn Ethical and Empirical Analysis
Ezekiel J. Emanuel, MD, PhD;
Linda L. Emanuel, MD, PhD
JAMA. 1992;267(15):2067-2071.
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings. |
|
|
|
RECENTLY, proxy or surrogate decision making regarding the termination of life-sustaining interventions for incompetent patients has been widely endorsed and promoted. After the Cruzan decision and the Patient Self-Determination Act of 1990, many states enacted proxy statutes specifically for health care. Indeed, even states such as New York and Massachusetts, which in the past had avoided enacting any legislation on living wills and securing the rights of patients, have quickly adopted
See also pp 2082 and 2101. health care proxy laws. Simultaneously with this growing enthusiasm for proxy decision making have arisen ethical and empirical doubts about whether proxies can select interventions that the patient would have selected. These divergent trends confront us just as there is a growing need to develop policies on this issue. Consequently, it is important to examine several questions on proxy decision making: How widely endorsed is proxy decision making? What is the justification of
. . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]
Author Affiliations
From the Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Control, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (Dr E. J. Emanuel) and the Division of Medical Ethics, Harvard Medical School (Dr L. L. Emanuel), Boston, Mass. Dr L. L. Emanuel is also a teaching and research scholar of the American College of Physicians.
Footnotes
Reprint requests to Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 44 Binney St, Boston, MA 02115 (Dr E. J. Emanuel).
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
RELATED LETTER
Ethics of Surrogate Consent for Living Organ Donation—Reply
David Wendler and Ezekiel Emanuel
JAMA. 2004;292(14):1685.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
