Decisional Capacity: Two Philosophical Issues

Journal of Clinical Ethics 33 (4):333-346 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX


In this article I note two ways in which current assessments of patients’ decisional capacity rest on disputable philosophical assumptions. The first disputable assumption concerns the nature of practical reason; the second concerns patients’ articulation of their preferences. I do not argue that clinical practice should be changed. Still, relying on disputable philosophical assumptions can distort the description of such practice. It would be good for philosophers and philosophically oriented clinicians to work with a philosophically accurate account of clinical practice. Moreover, every so often more accurate description might make for better practice.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,069

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Decision-Making Capacity.Jennifer Hawkins & Louis C. Charland - 2020 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
On risk and decisional capacity.David Checkland - 2001 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 26 (1):35 – 59.
A Justifiable Asymmetry.Mark Siegler & Daniel Brudney - 2015 - Journal of Clinical Ethics 26 (2):100-103.


Added to PP

6 (#1,290,331)

6 months
3 (#503,027)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Daniel Brudney
University of Chicago

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references