The browser you are using is not supported by this website. All versions of Internet Explorer are no longer supported, either by us or Microsoft (read more here: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/windows/end-of-ie-support).

Please use a modern browser to fully experience our website, such as the newest versions of Edge, Chrome, Firefox or Safari etc.

Empirical Fallacies in the Debate on Substituted Judgment.

På svenska

Author

Summary, in English

According to the Substituted Judgment Standard a surrogate decision maker ought to make the decision that the incompetent patient would have made, had he or she been competent. This standard has received a fair amount of criticism, but the objections raised are often wide of the mark. In this article we discuss three objections based on empirical research, and explain why these do not give us reason to abandon the Substituted Judgment Standard.

Department/s

Publishing year

2014

Language

English

Pages

73-81

Publication/Series

Health Care Analysis

Volume

22

Issue

1

Document type

Journal article

Publisher

Springer

Topic

  • Health Care Service and Management, Health Policy and Services and Health Economy

Keywords

  • * Incompetence * Substituted Judgment Standard * Proxy decision making

Status

Published

ISBN/ISSN/Other

  • ISSN: 1573-3394