Individualism and the Decision to Withdraw Life Support
AbstractThe 1996 Health Care Consent Act of Ontario (Canada) is a law that regulates medical decision making. Therefore, it also gives indications on how end of life decisions should be made. The goal of the law was to ensure and protect patient’s autonomy and avoid medical paternalism, especially at the end of life. Throughout this article, I would like to argue that one of the consequences of the 1996 Health Care Consent Act of Ontario is to promote individualism. Therefore, this law makes it improbable to attain a shared decision model. More specifically, the way the 1996 Health Care Consent Act is currently written, a proxy is assigned as a decision-maker for someone who is deemed incompetent. However, it also ensures that the proxy will be the only one with the burden of that decision. This argument will be supported by providing a qualitative description of three cases that I have encountered during my six-month fieldwork in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of a hospital located in Ontario. This paper offers a reflection upon the consequences of using an alternative decision maker (proxy) to withdraw life support. View Full-Text
Share & Cite This Article
Chartrand, L. Individualism and the Decision to Withdraw Life Support. Societies 2018, 8, 117.
Chartrand L. Individualism and the Decision to Withdraw Life Support. Societies. 2018; 8(4):117.Chicago/Turabian Style
Chartrand, Louise. 2018. "Individualism and the Decision to Withdraw Life Support." Societies 8, no. 4: 117.
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.