Affect, Values and Problems Assessing Decision-Making Capacity.

IF 17 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
American Journal of Bioethics Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2023-06-26 DOI:10.1080/15265161.2023.2224273
Jennifer Hawkins
{"title":"Affect, Values and Problems Assessing Decision-Making Capacity.","authors":"Jennifer Hawkins","doi":"10.1080/15265161.2023.2224273","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The dominant approach to assessing decision-making capacity in medicine focuses on determining the extent to which individuals possess certain core cognitive abilities. Critics have argued that this model delivers the wrong verdict in certain cases where patient values that are the product of mental disorder or disordered affective states undermine decision-making without undermining cognition. I argue for a re-conceptualization of what it is to possess the capacity to make medical treatment decisions. It is, I argue, <i>the ability to track one's own personal interests at least as well as most people can</i>. Using this idea, I demonstrate that it is possible to craft a solution for the problem cases-one that neither alters existing criteria in dangerous ways (e.g. does not open the door to various kinds of abuse) nor violates the spirit of widely accepted ethical constraints on decision-making assessment.</p>","PeriodicalId":50962,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Bioethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":17.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2023.2224273","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The dominant approach to assessing decision-making capacity in medicine focuses on determining the extent to which individuals possess certain core cognitive abilities. Critics have argued that this model delivers the wrong verdict in certain cases where patient values that are the product of mental disorder or disordered affective states undermine decision-making without undermining cognition. I argue for a re-conceptualization of what it is to possess the capacity to make medical treatment decisions. It is, I argue, the ability to track one's own personal interests at least as well as most people can. Using this idea, I demonstrate that it is possible to craft a solution for the problem cases-one that neither alters existing criteria in dangerous ways (e.g. does not open the door to various kinds of abuse) nor violates the spirit of widely accepted ethical constraints on decision-making assessment.

评估决策能力的情感、价值观和问题。
医学界评估决策能力的主流方法侧重于确定个人在多大程度上具备某些核心认知能力。批评者认为,在某些情况下,这种模式得出了错误的结论,即患者的价值观是精神失常或情感失调的产物,会在不损害认知能力的情况下损害决策能力。我主张重新认识拥有医疗决策能力的含义。我认为,这是一种至少能像大多数人一样追踪自己个人利益的能力。利用这一理念,我证明有可能为问题病例制定出一种解决方案--既不会以危险的方式改变现有标准(例如不会为各种滥用打开方便之门),也不会违反广泛接受的决策评估伦理约束的精神。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American Journal of Bioethics
American Journal of Bioethics 社会科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
12.30
自引率
26.90%
发文量
250
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Bioethics (AJOB) is a renowned global publication focused on bioethics. It tackles pressing ethical challenges in the realm of health sciences. With a commitment to the original vision of bioethics, AJOB explores the social consequences of advancements in biomedicine. It sparks meaningful discussions that have proved invaluable to a wide range of professionals, including judges, senators, journalists, scholars, and educators. AJOB covers various areas of interest, such as the ethical implications of clinical research, ensuring access to healthcare services, and the responsible handling of medical records and data. The journal welcomes contributions in the form of target articles presenting original research, open peer commentaries facilitating a dialogue, book reviews, and responses to open peer commentaries. By presenting insightful and authoritative content, AJOB continues to shape the field of bioethics and engage diverse stakeholders in crucial conversations about the intersection of medicine, ethics, and society.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信