A Communal Vision of Care for Incompetent Patients

Hastings Center Report 17 (5):15-20 (1987)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In a pluralistic society, the “best interests” standard is an inadequate criterion for determining what level of medical care to provide incompetent patients. Instead, the standard of care should be derived from the deliberations of particular communities. A “community‐federated” plan would enhance individual choice and diminish family and physician uncertainty.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,010

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Determining proxy consent.Richard O'Neil - 1983 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 8 (4):389-403.
The Sticky Standard of Care.Michelle Oberman - 2017 - Hastings Center Report 47 (6):25-26.
Should Age Be a Criterion in Health Care?Mark Siegler - 1984 - Hastings Center Report 14 (5):24-27.
Why Britain Can't Afford Informed Consent.Robert Schwartz & Andrew Grubb - 1985 - Hastings Center Report 15 (4):19-25.
Cost Constraints as a Malpractice Defense.E. Haavi Morreim - 1988 - Hastings Center Report 18 (1):5-10.
Good Decisionmaking for Incompetent Patients.Dan W. Brock - 1994 - Hastings Center Report 24 (6):8-11.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-11-22

Downloads
29 (#775,805)

6 months
9 (#488,506)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references