Search

The article discusses the ethical and legal aspects of decisions by healthcare providers to limit the provision of life-sustaining medical treatments without consent from patients or medical surrogates, and it mentions the joint guidelines issued by critical care societies in North America and Europe. American medical ethics and the Texas Advance Directives Act are addressed, along with U.S. informed consent laws and medical law cases such as Bryan v. Rectors of the University of Virginia.

The article discusses the revisions that the Florida Legislature made to the Florida Health Care Surrogates Act which became effective on October 1, 2015, including information about minor children and making changes to health care surrogate forms and designations of health care surrogates.

This Article examines the role of religion in the creation and enforcement of advance medical directives. It begins by setting out the principal similarities and differences between the two types of such directives-- namely, living wills and health care proxies (or powers of attorney). It then considers the formulation of religiously oriented advance directives and their incorporation of religious doctrine and imperatives. The Article then addresses the impact that the religious views of an individual patient's treating physician might have on such directives. Finally, the Article analyzes religiously based challenges to the enforcement of advance medical directives, paying particular attention to the Terri Schiavo case and its continuing significance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Western industrialized countries, it is well established that legally competent individuals may choose a surrogate healthcare decision-maker to represent their interests should they lose the capacity to do so themselves. There are few limitations on who they may select to fulfill this function. However, many jurisdictions place restrictions on or prohibit the patient's attending physician or other provider involved with an individual's care to serve in this role. Several authors have previously suggested that respect for the autonomy of patients requires that there be few (if any) constraints on whomever they may appoint as a proxy. In this essay we revisit this topic by first providing a survey of current state laws governing this activity. We then analyze the clinical and ethical circumstances in which potential difficulties could arise. We take a more nuanced and circumspect view of prior suggestions that patients should have virtually unfettered liberty to choose their healthcare proxies. We suggest a strategy to balance the freedom of patients' right to choose their surrogates with fiduciary duty of the state as regulator of medical practice. We identify six domains of possible concern with such relationships and suggest straightforward methods of mitigating their potential negative effects that could be plausibly be incorporated into physician practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the roles that advance directives (ADs) play in health care planning in America, and it mentions AD laws in places such as New York, AD-related accessibility, and the author's suggestions for overcoming obstacles to the use and efficiency of ADs in America. It states that Living Wills, Health Care Proxies, and Medical Powers of Attorney are tools which allow people to communicate their end-of-life decisions to friends, family, and health care professionals.

The article examine the Massachusetts State legislative frame work related to right to die. Topics discussed include end-of-life options available to dying patients in Massachusetts; need of legislation to create an affirmative permission for aid in dying; use of palliative care for people with serious illnesses; and Massachusetts Health Care Proxies Laws.