Hastings Cent Rep. 2019 Mar;49(2):9-16. doi: 10.1002/hast.988.
Jack, who is seventy-five years old, is in the hospital with a terminal condition that has undermined his cognitive faculties. He has left no advance directive and has never had a conversation in which he made his treatment wishes remotely clear. Yet now, a treatment decision must be made, and in modern American medicine, the treatment decision for Jack is supposed to be made by a surrogate decision-maker, who is supposed to use a decision-making standard known as "substituted judgment." According to the substituted judgment standard, Jack's surrogate decision-maker, his wife, is supposed to decide on his treatment by determining what Jack would do if he did have decisional capacity. That is, she is supposed to answer the question, what would the patient choose? I will argue that this is the wrong question to ask because when the question has a determinate answer, that answer is sometimes not sufficiently connected to the value that is supposed to make the question morally salient, and because sometimes, perhaps often, there is no determinate answer to the question of what the patient would choose. Jointly, these two problems suggest the need for a different question.
杰克现年 75 岁,因终末期疾病住进了医院,他的认知能力因此受损。他没有预先指示,也从未进行过任何对话,明确表达过自己的治疗意愿。然而,现在必须做出治疗决定,而在现代美国医学中,杰克的治疗决定应由替代决策人做出,替代决策人应使用一种名为“替代性判断”的决策标准。根据替代性判断标准,杰克的替代决策人,他的妻子,应该通过确定杰克如果有决策能力会怎么做来决定他的治疗方案。也就是说,她应该回答这个问题:病人会选择什么?我将论证,这是一个错误的问题,因为当问题有一个确定的答案时,这个答案有时与应该使问题在道德上突出的价值没有足够的联系,而且因为有时,也许经常,对于病人会选择什么,这个问题没有确定的答案。这两个问题共同表明,需要一个不同的问题。