Guardianship and end-of-life decision making

Andrew B. Cohen, Megan Wright, Leo Cooney, Terri Fried

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

As the population ages, more adults will develop impaired decision-making capacity and have no family members or friends available to make medical decisions on their behalf. In such situations, a professional guardian is often appointed by the court. This official has no preexisting relationship with the impaired individual but is paid to serve as a surrogate decision maker. When a professional guardian is faced with decisions concerning life-sustaining treatment, substituted judgment may be impossible, and reports have repeatedly suggested that guardians are reluctant to make the decision to limit care. Physicians are well positioned to assist guardians with these decisions and safeguard the rights of the vulnerable persons they represent. Doing so effectively requires knowledge of the laws governing end-of-life decisions by guardians. However, physicians are often uncertain about whether guardians are empowered to withhold treatment and when their decisions require judicial review. To address this issue, we analyzed state guardianship statutes and reviewed recent legal cases to characterize the authority of a guardian over choices about end-of-life treatment. We found that most state guardianship statutes have no language about end-of-life decisions. We identified 5 legal cases during the past decade that addressed a guardian's authority over these decisions, and only 1 case provided a broad framework applicable to clinical practice. Work to improve end-of-life decision making by guardians may benefit from a multidisciplinary effort to develop comprehensive standards to guide clinicians and guardians when treatment decisions need to be made.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1687-1691
Number of pages5
JournalJAMA Internal Medicine
Volume175
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2015

Fingerprint

Decision Making
Physicians
Therapeutics
Language
Population

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Internal Medicine

Cite this

Cohen, Andrew B. ; Wright, Megan ; Cooney, Leo ; Fried, Terri. / Guardianship and end-of-life decision making. In: JAMA Internal Medicine. 2015 ; Vol. 175, No. 10. pp. 1687-1691.
@article{5c9bd81b8811470f81f0822701368c1c,
title = "Guardianship and end-of-life decision making",
abstract = "As the population ages, more adults will develop impaired decision-making capacity and have no family members or friends available to make medical decisions on their behalf. In such situations, a professional guardian is often appointed by the court. This official has no preexisting relationship with the impaired individual but is paid to serve as a surrogate decision maker. When a professional guardian is faced with decisions concerning life-sustaining treatment, substituted judgment may be impossible, and reports have repeatedly suggested that guardians are reluctant to make the decision to limit care. Physicians are well positioned to assist guardians with these decisions and safeguard the rights of the vulnerable persons they represent. Doing so effectively requires knowledge of the laws governing end-of-life decisions by guardians. However, physicians are often uncertain about whether guardians are empowered to withhold treatment and when their decisions require judicial review. To address this issue, we analyzed state guardianship statutes and reviewed recent legal cases to characterize the authority of a guardian over choices about end-of-life treatment. We found that most state guardianship statutes have no language about end-of-life decisions. We identified 5 legal cases during the past decade that addressed a guardian's authority over these decisions, and only 1 case provided a broad framework applicable to clinical practice. Work to improve end-of-life decision making by guardians may benefit from a multidisciplinary effort to develop comprehensive standards to guide clinicians and guardians when treatment decisions need to be made.",
author = "Cohen, {Andrew B.} and Megan Wright and Leo Cooney and Terri Fried",
year = "2015",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.3956",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "175",
pages = "1687--1691",
journal = "JAMA Internal Medicine",
issn = "2168-6106",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "10",

}

Guardianship and end-of-life decision making. / Cohen, Andrew B.; Wright, Megan; Cooney, Leo; Fried, Terri.

In: JAMA Internal Medicine, Vol. 175, No. 10, 01.10.2015, p. 1687-1691.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Guardianship and end-of-life decision making

AU - Cohen, Andrew B.

AU - Wright, Megan

AU - Cooney, Leo

AU - Fried, Terri

PY - 2015/10/1

Y1 - 2015/10/1

N2 - As the population ages, more adults will develop impaired decision-making capacity and have no family members or friends available to make medical decisions on their behalf. In such situations, a professional guardian is often appointed by the court. This official has no preexisting relationship with the impaired individual but is paid to serve as a surrogate decision maker. When a professional guardian is faced with decisions concerning life-sustaining treatment, substituted judgment may be impossible, and reports have repeatedly suggested that guardians are reluctant to make the decision to limit care. Physicians are well positioned to assist guardians with these decisions and safeguard the rights of the vulnerable persons they represent. Doing so effectively requires knowledge of the laws governing end-of-life decisions by guardians. However, physicians are often uncertain about whether guardians are empowered to withhold treatment and when their decisions require judicial review. To address this issue, we analyzed state guardianship statutes and reviewed recent legal cases to characterize the authority of a guardian over choices about end-of-life treatment. We found that most state guardianship statutes have no language about end-of-life decisions. We identified 5 legal cases during the past decade that addressed a guardian's authority over these decisions, and only 1 case provided a broad framework applicable to clinical practice. Work to improve end-of-life decision making by guardians may benefit from a multidisciplinary effort to develop comprehensive standards to guide clinicians and guardians when treatment decisions need to be made.

AB - As the population ages, more adults will develop impaired decision-making capacity and have no family members or friends available to make medical decisions on their behalf. In such situations, a professional guardian is often appointed by the court. This official has no preexisting relationship with the impaired individual but is paid to serve as a surrogate decision maker. When a professional guardian is faced with decisions concerning life-sustaining treatment, substituted judgment may be impossible, and reports have repeatedly suggested that guardians are reluctant to make the decision to limit care. Physicians are well positioned to assist guardians with these decisions and safeguard the rights of the vulnerable persons they represent. Doing so effectively requires knowledge of the laws governing end-of-life decisions by guardians. However, physicians are often uncertain about whether guardians are empowered to withhold treatment and when their decisions require judicial review. To address this issue, we analyzed state guardianship statutes and reviewed recent legal cases to characterize the authority of a guardian over choices about end-of-life treatment. We found that most state guardianship statutes have no language about end-of-life decisions. We identified 5 legal cases during the past decade that addressed a guardian's authority over these decisions, and only 1 case provided a broad framework applicable to clinical practice. Work to improve end-of-life decision making by guardians may benefit from a multidisciplinary effort to develop comprehensive standards to guide clinicians and guardians when treatment decisions need to be made.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84943563808&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84943563808&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.3956

DO - 10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.3956

M3 - Review article

C2 - 26258634

AN - SCOPUS:84943563808

VL - 175

SP - 1687

EP - 1691

JO - JAMA Internal Medicine

JF - JAMA Internal Medicine

SN - 2168-6106

IS - 10

ER -