{"title":"评估决策能力的情感、价值观和问题。","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":"{\"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}","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}
Affect, Values and Problems Assessing Decision-Making Capacity.
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.
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.