Advancing an advance directive debate.
A challenge has recently been levelled against the legal and/or moral legitimacy of some advance directives. It has been argued that in certain cases an advance directive carries no weight in a decision on whether to withhold treatment, since the individual in the debilitating state is not the same person as the person who created the advance directive. In the first section of this paper, I examine two formulations of the argument against the moral legitimacy of the advance directives under review. The second section reviews, and criticizes, an objection to such arguments. In the penultimate section, possible models supporting the viability of the advance directives are considered. The final section makes good on an obligation incurred by the title of the paper.
University of Redlands, Department of Philosophy, Redlands, California 92373, USA. chris_buford@redlands.edu
Christopher
C
Buford
D024362:Advance Directive Adherence / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D016223:Advance Directives / Q000941:ethics* / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence / Q000523:psychology; D001293:Attitude to Death; D003657:Decision Making; D006801:Humans; D016743:Mental Competency / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence* / Q000523:psychology; D008960:Models, Psychological; D028723:Personhood