Hastings Cent Rep. 2022 Jan;52(1):32-41. doi: 10.1002/hast.1338.
In medical ethics, there is a well-established debate about the authority of advance directives over people living with dementia, a dispute often cast as a clash between two principles: respecting autonomy and beneficence toward patients. In this article, I argue that there need be only one principle in substitute decision-making: determining authenticity. This principle favors a substituted judgment standard in all cases and instructs decision-makers to determine what the patient would authentically prefer to happen-based not merely on the patient's decisions but also on their present settled dispositions. Adhering to this principle entails that, in a significant range of cases, an advance directive can (and indeed ought to) be overruled.
在医学伦理学中,关于具有痴呆症的人的预先指示的权威,存在着一场既定的辩论,这场争论常常被视为两个原则之间的冲突:尊重自主和对患者的善行。在本文中,我认为在替代决策中只需要一个原则:确定真实性。这个原则在所有情况下都赞成替代判断标准,并指示决策者根据患者的当前既定倾向来确定患者真正希望发生的事情,而不仅仅是基于患者的决定。坚持这一原则意味着,在很大一部分情况下,预先指示可以(并且确实应该)被推翻。