CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 22Palliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesEthics and bioethics in healthcareHealthcare Decision-Making and Restraints

Advance directives and discrimination against people with dementia

Dresser, Rebecca·2018·Hastings Center Report
DOI 10.1002/hast.867
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In the article "On Avoiding Deep Dementia," Norman Cantor defends a position that I suspect many readers share. In my years writing and speaking on advance directives and dementia, I've found that most people support one of two positions. They are convinced either that advance choices should control the treatment dementia patients receive or that the welfare of a person with dementia should sometimes take priority over earlier choices. As Cantor points out, I support the second position. I agree with several of Cantor's arguments. Where Cantor and I part ways is over the degree of control that advance directives should exert over the care of persons with moderate dementia. Although I don't welcome the prospect of living with dementia, I believe that people with the condition should be represented in the debate over treatment standards. It's not surprising that many, perhaps most, people unaffected by dementia think that their preferences should control the care they would receive as dementia patients. But people taking this position are neglecting the concerns and interests they may have as dementia patients.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hast.867

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Much of the debate about dementia EAS focuses on challenges in determining decisional capacity, evaluating an advance euthanasia directive's applicability, assessing unbearable suffering, and implementing the EAS procedure in advance request cases.

    “Much of the debate about dementia EAS focuses on challenges in determining decisional capacity, evaluating an advance euthanasia directive’s applicability, assessing unbearable suffering, and implementing the EAS procedure in advance request cases.(2, 11–16)”

    From Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide of Persons With Dementia in the Netherlands (2020) · cites this paper as [12]

  • Key points of debate regarding advance requests-including difficulties interpreting advance euthanasia directives, assessing unbearable suffering, and implementing the EAS procedure-are indeed problems that arise in advance request EAS.

    “It also appears that key points of debate regarding advance requests(11–16)—including difficulties interpreting advance euthanasia directives, assessing unbearable suffering, and implementing the EAS procedure—are indeed problems that arise in advance request EAS.”

    From Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide of Persons With Dementia in the Netherlands (2020) · cites this paper as [12]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Dresser, R.
Corresponding author
Dresser, Rebecca
Venue
Hastings Center Report
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-07
Volume
48
Issue
4
Pages
26-27
ISSN
  • 0093-0334 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-146X
DOI
10.1002/hast.867
OpenAlex
W2885739898
Cited by
22
References
10
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 11
FWCI
3.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 46 d)
Locations
  • The Hastings Center Report (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
Keywords
advance directives, dementia, discrimination, treatment decision-making, patient preferences, moderate dementia, standard of care, patient representation, end-of-life care

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review