研究预先指示:对阿尔茨海默病患者和老年痴呆症患者家属的伦理影响。

IF 1.7 4区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS
Dean Evan Hart
{"title":"研究预先指示:对阿尔茨海默病患者和老年痴呆症患者家属的伦理影响。","authors":"Dean Evan Hart","doi":"10.1017/jme.2025.10185","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>As both human longevity and diagnostic ability improve, more individuals are being diagnosed with Alzheimer's dementia disease (Alzheimer's). Yet there is a paucity of new Alzheimer's research trials. One obstacle to research is the large number of Alzheimer's patients deemed incapable of providing informed consent for clinical research. Research advance directives (RADs) offer patients the opportunity to provide informed consent before incapacity occurs. However, critics question whether RADs guarantee informed consent, claiming that due to the nature of the disease, the consenting agent is no longer the same person after becoming incapacitated. This paper assesses the debate while using a conception of personhood, informed by the latest Alzheimer's research, which does not reduce the concept of personhood to psychological capacities. It explains how personal identity can persist despite Alzheimer's, such that RADs can and should suffice for informed consent.</p>","PeriodicalId":50165,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics","volume":" ","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Research Advance Directives: Ethical Implications for Persons with Alzheimer's Disease, and for the Families of Elderly Dementia Patients.\",\"authors\":\"Dean Evan Hart\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/jme.2025.10185\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>As both human longevity and diagnostic ability improve, more individuals are being diagnosed with Alzheimer's dementia disease (Alzheimer's). Yet there is a paucity of new Alzheimer's research trials. One obstacle to research is the large number of Alzheimer's patients deemed incapable of providing informed consent for clinical research. Research advance directives (RADs) offer patients the opportunity to provide informed consent before incapacity occurs. However, critics question whether RADs guarantee informed consent, claiming that due to the nature of the disease, the consenting agent is no longer the same person after becoming incapacitated. This paper assesses the debate while using a conception of personhood, informed by the latest Alzheimer's research, which does not reduce the concept of personhood to psychological capacities. It explains how personal identity can persist despite Alzheimer's, such that RADs can and should suffice for informed consent.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50165,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-9\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/jme.2025.10185\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/jme.2025.10185","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着人类寿命和诊断能力的提高,越来越多的人被诊断为阿尔茨海默氏痴呆症(Alzheimer's)。然而,阿尔茨海默病的新研究试验却很少。研究的一个障碍是大量阿尔茨海默病患者被认为没有能力为临床研究提供知情同意。研究预先指示(RADs)为患者提供了在丧失行为能力之前提供知情同意的机会。然而,批评者质疑RADs是否保证知情同意,声称由于疾病的性质,同意代理人在丧失行为能力后不再是同一个人。本文通过最新的阿尔茨海默氏症研究,并没有将人格的概念减少到心理能力,同时使用人格的概念来评估辩论。它解释了尽管患有阿尔茨海默病,但个人身份如何能够持续存在,因此RADs可以而且应该足以满足知情同意的要求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Research Advance Directives: Ethical Implications for Persons with Alzheimer's Disease, and for the Families of Elderly Dementia Patients.

As both human longevity and diagnostic ability improve, more individuals are being diagnosed with Alzheimer's dementia disease (Alzheimer's). Yet there is a paucity of new Alzheimer's research trials. One obstacle to research is the large number of Alzheimer's patients deemed incapable of providing informed consent for clinical research. Research advance directives (RADs) offer patients the opportunity to provide informed consent before incapacity occurs. However, critics question whether RADs guarantee informed consent, claiming that due to the nature of the disease, the consenting agent is no longer the same person after becoming incapacitated. This paper assesses the debate while using a conception of personhood, informed by the latest Alzheimer's research, which does not reduce the concept of personhood to psychological capacities. It explains how personal identity can persist despite Alzheimer's, such that RADs can and should suffice for informed consent.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics
Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics 医学-医学:法
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
4.80%
发文量
70
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Material published in The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics (JLME) contributes to the educational mission of The American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics, covering public health, health disparities, patient safety and quality of care, and biomedical science and research. It provides articles on such timely topics as health care quality and access, managed care, pain relief, genetics, child/maternal health, reproductive health, informed consent, assisted dying, ethics committees, HIV/AIDS, and public health. Symposium issues review significant policy developments, health law court decisions, and books.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信