Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-g4pgd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-18T05:36:19.001Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Patient Self-Determination Act: Potential Ethical Quandaries and Benefits

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 December 2009

Ernlé W. D. Young  and
Shelli A. Jex
Ernlé W. D. Young
Affiliation:
Co-Director of the Center for Biomedical Ethics, Stanford University, and serves as the ethics consultant to and chairs the Ethics Committee of the Stanford University Hospital.
Shelli A. Jex
Affiliation:
M.T.S., is a research assistant at the Stanford University Center for Biomedical Ethics and a member of the California Consortium on Patient Self-Determination
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

As Part of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, the Patient Self Determination Act (PSDA) legislates new responsibilites for healthcare facilities. The authors served as members of the California Consortium on Patient Self-Determination, and the materials produced by this group offer healthcare facilities a valuable guide for implementing the PSDA. The ACt follows a historical trend led by doctrines of informed consent and increasing patient autonomy regarding rights to accept or refuse medical treatment and to execute advance directives. The requirements of the Act will influence healthcare facilities and how they communicate with patients about advance directives. Although the Act seeks to increase awareness of advance directices among all participants in healthcare interactions, it could pose major stumbling blocks to providing sensitive and humane care if certain concerns are nor addressed adequatley. The benefits of the Act could be far reaching and substantial for patients and healthcare facilities alike.

Information

Type
Special Section: The Patient Self-Determination Act
Information
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics , Volume 1 , Issue 2 , Spring 1992 , pp. 107 - 115
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Notes

1. Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospital, 211 NY, 125, 105 NE 92 (1914).Google Scholar

2. Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Dept of Health, 110 s Ct 2841, (1990).Google Scholar

3. White, ML, Fletcher, JC.The PSDA: on balance, more help than hindrance. Journal of the American Medical Association 1991; 266: 410–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

4. Orentlicher, D.Advance medical directives. Office of the General Counsel. Journal of the American Medical Association 1990; 263: 2367.Google Scholar

5. McCloskey, EL.The Patient Self-Determination Act. Bioethics inside the beltway. Kennedy Institute of Ethics journal 1991; 1: 165–6. See p. 165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6. McCloskey, EL.The Patient Self-Determination Act. Bioethics inside the beltway. Kennedy Institute of Ethics journal 1991; 1: 165–6. See p. 165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7. McCloskey, EL.The Patient Self-Determination Act. Bioethics inside the beltway. Kennedy Institute of Ethics journal 1991; 1: 165–6. See p. 165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8. McCloskey, EL.The Patient Self-Determination Act. Bioethics inside the beltway. Kennedy Institute of Ethics journal 1991; 1: 165–6. See p. 165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

9. See note 5. McCloskey. 1991; 1: 166.Google Scholar

10. See note 3, White, Fletcher. 1991; 266: 411.Google Scholar

11. Hospital Admitting Monthly 1991: 10 (6): 74.Google Scholar

12. LaPuma, J.Orentlicher, DMoss, R.Advance directives on admission: clinical implications and analysis of the Patient Self-Determination Act of 1990. journal of the American Medical Association 1991; 266: 402–5. See p. 403.Google Scholar

13. Emanuel, LL.Barry, MJStoeckle, JD. et al.Advance directives for medical care—a case for greater use. New England Journal of Medicine 1991; 324 889–895.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

14. See note 12. LaPuma et al. 1991; 266: 402.Google Scholar

15. See note 12. LaPuma et al. 1991; 266: 404.Google Scholar

16. See note 12. LaPuma et al. 1991; 266: 405.Google Scholar

17. See note 12. LaPuma et al. 1991; 266: 405.Google Scholar

18. See note 12. LaPuma et al. 1991; 266: 402.Google Scholar

19. See note 12. LaPuma et al. 1991; 266: 404.Google Scholar

20. See Rouse, F.Mrs. Wanglie and “Doctor Knows best” and making decisions for those who cannot decide for themselves: autonomy in two recent cases. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 1992; 2: 165–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

21. See note 12. LaPuma et al. 1991; 266: 403.Google Scholar

22. Cassel, CK.Zweibel, NR.Attitudes regarding life-extending medical care among the elderly and their children Gerntologist 1987; 27 (special issue):229A.Google Scholar

23. See note 12. LaPuma et al. 1991; 266: 402.Google Scholar

24. McCloskey, EL.The Spirit of the PSDA. Practicing the PSDA, Special Supplement, Hastings center Report, 1991; 21 (5): S15.Google Scholar