基于价值的能力评估方法。

IF 0.3 4区 医学 Q3 LAW Journal of Legal Medicine Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1080/01947648.2022.2162171
Jacob M Appel
{"title":"基于价值的能力评估方法。","authors":"Jacob M Appel","doi":"10.1080/01947648.2022.2162171","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The dominant approaches to assessing patients for decisional capacity in the clinical setting, the \"four skills\" and \"sliding scale\" models, emerged in the 1970s and 1980s against a backdrop of medical paternalism and reflect their origins in law and forensic psychiatry. They privilege rationality and require the ability to defend one's decisions with knowledge and argument. Unfortunately, these approaches place a heavy burden upon patients who may hold preferences consistent with their underlying values but may not possess the education or reasoning skills necessary to meet the heavy burden imposed by current capacity standards. This article reviews the shortcomings of the dominant models. Then the article proposes a novel value-based approach to capacity assessment that places primary emphasis upon the patient's underlying and longstanding values and the concordance of those values with the patient's current wishes and preferences.</p>","PeriodicalId":44014,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Values-Based Approach to Capacity Assessment.\",\"authors\":\"Jacob M Appel\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/01947648.2022.2162171\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The dominant approaches to assessing patients for decisional capacity in the clinical setting, the \\\"four skills\\\" and \\\"sliding scale\\\" models, emerged in the 1970s and 1980s against a backdrop of medical paternalism and reflect their origins in law and forensic psychiatry. They privilege rationality and require the ability to defend one's decisions with knowledge and argument. Unfortunately, these approaches place a heavy burden upon patients who may hold preferences consistent with their underlying values but may not possess the education or reasoning skills necessary to meet the heavy burden imposed by current capacity standards. This article reviews the shortcomings of the dominant models. Then the article proposes a novel value-based approach to capacity assessment that places primary emphasis upon the patient's underlying and longstanding values and the concordance of those values with the patient's current wishes and preferences.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44014,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Legal Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Legal Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/01947648.2022.2162171\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Legal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01947648.2022.2162171","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

在临床环境中,评估病人决策能力的主要方法是“四项技能”和“滑动量表”模型,它们出现在20世纪70年代和80年代的医疗家长制背景下,反映了它们在法律和法医精神病学中的起源。他们推崇理性,要求有能力用知识和论证来捍卫自己的决定。不幸的是,这些方法给患者带来了沉重的负担,他们可能持有与其潜在价值观一致的偏好,但可能不具备满足当前能力标准所施加的沉重负担所需的教育或推理技能。本文回顾了主流模型的不足。然后,文章提出了一种新的基于价值的能力评估方法,该方法主要强调患者的潜在和长期价值观,以及这些价值观与患者当前愿望和偏好的一致性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Values-Based Approach to Capacity Assessment.

The dominant approaches to assessing patients for decisional capacity in the clinical setting, the "four skills" and "sliding scale" models, emerged in the 1970s and 1980s against a backdrop of medical paternalism and reflect their origins in law and forensic psychiatry. They privilege rationality and require the ability to defend one's decisions with knowledge and argument. Unfortunately, these approaches place a heavy burden upon patients who may hold preferences consistent with their underlying values but may not possess the education or reasoning skills necessary to meet the heavy burden imposed by current capacity standards. This article reviews the shortcomings of the dominant models. Then the article proposes a novel value-based approach to capacity assessment that places primary emphasis upon the patient's underlying and longstanding values and the concordance of those values with the patient's current wishes and preferences.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
3
期刊介绍: The Journal of Legal Medicine is the official quarterly publication of the American College of Legal Medicine (ACLM). Incorporated in 1960, the ACLM has among its objectives the fostering and encouragement of research and study in the field of legal medicine. The Journal of Legal Medicine is internationally circulated and includes articles and commentaries on topics of interest in legal medicine, health law and policy, professional liability, hospital law, food and drug law, medical legal research and education, the history of legal medicine, and a broad range of other related topics. Book review essays, featuring leading contributions to the field, are included in each issue.
期刊最新文献
The Problem with Using Medical Boards to Regulate Misinformation 2022-2023 Southern Illinois University National Health Law Moot Court Competition. 2022-2023 Southern Illinois University National Health Law Moot Court Competition: Winning Brief. Fitness to Drive: It is Time for Evidence-Based Consensus and Italian Guidelines for Medical Driving Assessment. Who Decides? State Bans on Gender-Affirming Care for Minors in Tension with Parental Rights and Equal Protection Under the Law.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1