Show simple item record

dc.creatorCherry, Mark J.en
dc.creatorEngelhardt, H. Tristram, Jr.en
dc.date.accessioned2016-01-09T00:00:49Zen
dc.date.available2016-01-09T00:00:49Zen
dc.date.created2004-04en
dc.date.issued2004-04en
dc.identifierdoi:10.1076/jmep.29.2.237.31503en
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationJournal of Medicine and Philosophy 2004 April; 29(2): 237-252en
dc.identifier.urihttp://worldcatlibraries.org/registry/gateway?version=1.0&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&atitle=Informed+consent+in+Texas:+theory+and+practice&title=Journal+of+Medicine+and+Philosophy+&volume=29&issue=2&spage=237-252&date=2004-04&au=Cherry,+Mark+J.;+Engelhardt,+H.+Tristram,+Jr.en
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1076/jmep.29.2.237.31503en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10822/991619en
dc.description.abstractThe legal basis of informed consent in Texas may on first examination suggest an unqualified affirmation of persons as the source of authority over themselves. This view of individuals in the practice of informed consent tends to present persons outside of any social context in general and outside of their families in particular. The actual functioning of law and medical practice in Texas, however, is far more complex. This study begins with a brief overview of the roots of Texas law and public policy regarding informed consent. This surface account is then contrasted with examples drawn from the actual functioning of Texas law: Texas legislation regarding out-of-hospital do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders. As a default approach to medical decision-making when patients lose decisional capacity and have failed to appoint a formal proxy or establish their wishes, this law establishes a defeasible presumption in favor of what the law characterizes as "qualified relatives" who can function as decision-makers for those terminal family members who lose decisional capacity. The study shows how, in the face of a general affirmation of the autonomy of individuals as if they were morally and socially isolated agents, space is nevertheless made for families to choose on behalf of their own members. The result is a multi-tier public morality, one affirming individuals as morally authoritative and the other recognizing the decisional standing of families.en
dc.formatArticleen
dc.languageenen
dc.sourceeweb:271605en
dc.subjectAutonomyen
dc.subjectConsenten
dc.subjectFamily Membersen
dc.subjectLawen
dc.subjectLegislationen
dc.subjectMoralityen
dc.subjectPatientsen
dc.subjectProxyen
dc.subjectRelativesen
dc.subject.classificationProlongation of Life and Euthanasiaen
dc.subject.classificationInformed Consenten
dc.subject.classificationThird Party Consenten
dc.titleInformed Consent in Texas: Theory and Practiceen
dc.provenanceCitation prepared by the Library and Information Services group of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Georgetown University for the ETHXWeb database.en
dc.provenanceCitation migrated from OpenText LiveLink Discovery Server database named EWEB hosted by the Bioethics Research Library to the DSpace collection EthxWeb hosted by DigitalGeorgetown.en


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


Georgetown University Seal
©2009—2022 Bioethics Research Library
Box 571212 Washington DC 20057-1212
202.687.3885