The Ethox Centre, Department of Public Health, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Old Road, Oxford OX3 7LG, UK.
J Med Ethics. 2009 Dec;35(12):733-8. doi: 10.1136/jme.2009.030783.
The Mental Capacity Act (2005) is an impressive piece of legislation that deserves serious ethical attention, but much of the commentary on the Act has focussed on its legal and practical implications rather than the underlying ethical concepts. This paper examines the approach that the Act takes to best interests. The Act does not provide an account of the underlying concept of best interests. Instead it lists factors that must be considered in determining best interests, and the Code of Practice to the Act states that this list is incomplete. This paper argues that this general approach is correct, contrary to some accounts of best interests. The checklist includes items that are unhelpful. Furthermore, neither the Act nor its Code of Practice provides sufficient guidance to carers faced with difficult decisions concerning best interests. This paper suggests ways in which the checklist can be developed and discusses cases that could be used in an updated Code of Practice.
《精神能力法案(2005 年)》是一项令人印象深刻的立法,值得进行认真的伦理关注,但对该法案的评论大多集中在其法律和实际影响上,而不是潜在的伦理概念上。本文探讨了该法案对最佳利益的处理方法。该法案没有提供最佳利益的基本概念的说明。相反,它列出了在确定最佳利益时必须考虑的因素,该法案的实施准则指出,该清单并不完整。本文认为,这种总体方法是正确的,与一些最佳利益的说法相反。清单中包含了一些无益的项目。此外,法案及其实施准则都没有为面临有关最佳利益的困难决定的照顾者提供足够的指导。本文提出了如何改进清单的方法,并讨论了可用于更新的实施准则的案例。