Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. From Solo Decision Maker to Multi-Stakeholder Process: A Defense and Recommendations.David Ozar, Joseph Vukov, Kit Rempala & Rohan Meda - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (2):53-55.
    Berger (2019) argues effectively that “representativeness is more aptly understood as a variable that is multidimensional and continuous based on relational moral authority,” and also makes some useful suggestions about how taking this observation seriously might require changes in current patterns of practice regarding surrogates. But the essay raises additional important questions about how the Best Interest Standard (BIS) should be used among unrepresented patients and other patients as well because many surrogates besides those who “have no actionable knowledge of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Moral Intimacy, Authority, and Discretion.Ryan H. Nelson & Bryanna Moore - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (2):66-68.
    Volume 20, Issue 2, February 2020, Page 66-68.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Bolstering Surrogate Decision Making for Marginally Represented and Unrepresented Patients: One System’s Approach and Experience.Jordan Potter & Jason Lesandrini - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (2):62-64.
    Volume 20, Issue 2, February 2020, Page 62-64.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Epistemic Burdens, Moral Intimacy, and Surrogate Decision Making.Parker Crutchfield & Scott Scheall - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (2):59-61.
    Berger (forthcoming) states that moral intimacy is important in applying the best interests standard. But what he calls moral intimacy requires that someone has overcome epistemic burdens needed to represent the patient. We argue elsewhere that good surrogate decision-making is first and foremost a matter of overcoming epistemic burdens, or those obstacles that stand in the way of a surrogate decision-maker knowing what a patient wants and how to satisfy those preferences. Berger’s notion of moral intimacy depends on epistemic intimacy: (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Compassionate Care for the Unconscious and Incapacitated.Michael J. Young - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (2):55-57.
    Volume 20, Issue 2, February 2020, Page 55-57.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Decisional Humility and the Marginally Represented Patient.Barrie J. Huberman & Joseph J. Fins - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (2):51-53.
    Volume 20, Issue 2, February 2020, Page 51-53.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Marginally Represented Patients, Best Interests, and Ends-in-Themselves.Peter Shiu-Hwa Tsu - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (2):57-59.
    Volume 20, Issue 2, February 2020, Page 57-59.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • On Surrogates’ Moral Authority: A Reply to Berger.Ryan K. Hubbard & Jake Greenblum - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (2):64-66.
    Volume 20, Issue 2, February 2020, Page 64-66.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark