Blog

Legal Hierarchy of Surrogate Decision Makers

In the event that a substitute decision-maker has not been identified by a medical authority or a legal guardian appointed by the court, this agent is chosen by the medical staff. A patient must meet certain criteria before legally choosing an alternative agent in health care. The patient must have a disabling condition such as mental illness or infirmity, impairment in the ability to perform activities of daily living, cognitive impairment, and lack of a previously specified alternative to guardianship. This person is chosen either by the attending physician or by his or her pre-practice nurse. [11] In the United States, the hierarchy of health care surrogates may vary depending on state law, but here is an example of a priority order: When creating a power of attorney for health, it is best to consult a doctor and lawyer. The forms are available on the lawyers`, hospitals` and health ethics websites. The agent must identify the customer and the customer`s agent, including all contact information. The living will must state that the designated representative is authorized to make health care decisions on behalf of the patient and, if applicable, any restrictions placed on the agent`s authority. The document should make it clear that the agent`s authority does not begin until the patent is able to make health care decisions. When the document is ready, it must be signed and attested by two people who are not the patient`s agents, caregivers or relatives. The completed document must be signed by the witnesses and the client of the advance directive.

The document must be given to the doctor, lawyer, spouse/partner and patent family. The advance directive should be reviewed regularly and reflect changes in the client`s current marital status (e.g., marriage or divorce). In order for the agent to view the customer`s medical records, the agent must sign a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) authorization form. [7] [8] [9] [10] C. If none of the persons listed in subsections (A) (1) to (10) of this section is reasonably available, the patient`s treating physician has the discretion to perform or perform surgical or medical treatments or procedures, including, but not limited to, an autopsy, and may also make decisions regarding the continuation of the services required by the patient. including, but not limited to, authorizing the placement or transfer of the patient to another facility without the consent of the patient or any other person authorized to consent to the patient. Before taking such action, the treating physician must record in the patient`s record the facts that indicate what medical decisions need to be made and why those decisions need to be made promptly, as well as the steps taken to obtain the consent of the patient or any other person authorized by law, and then obtain confirmation from another physician. Preferably the patient`s family doctor, if he is not the attending physician, the patient`s condition and the medical need for appropriate measures compatible with the patient`s condition and which cannot be omitted without affecting the patient`s condition or the quality of the medical care provided. The confirming physician personally examines the patient and records his or her assessment, conclusions and recommendations in the patient`s chart before the proposed treatment or surgical or medical procedure is performed.

This subsection does not apply to an emergency subject to the provisions of R.S. 40:1299.54. As a result, we found that 41 provinces and territories include a provision for the appointment of a standard surrogate mother for at least some health decisions, legally recognizing the decision-making authority of standard surrogates, and providing a safety net for incapable patients without a living will. However, significant differences in relevant state legislation are at odds with calls to support and improve end-of-life care nationwide. At the 1991 annual meeting of the American Medical Association, the AMA adopted the Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs` report entitled “Decisions to Forego Life-Sustaining Treatment for Incompetent Patients”. The report`s recommendations formed the basis for amendments to Opinion 2.20, known as “refusal or interruption of life-sustaining medical treatment”. The report itself provides guidance for physicians who may need to identify a surrogate decision-maker, assist a surrogate (surrogate) in making decisions for incompetent patients, and resolve conflicts that may arise between decision-makers or between the decision-maker`s choice and medically appropriate options. Since these guidelines were first included in WADA`s Code of Ethics, the Board has refrained from issuing Opinion 2.20 in order to address issues concerning surrogacy decision-making, although the guidelines presented in this opinion refer only to decisions made towards the end of life. If there are several candidates at the same priority level in the hierarchical structure, it becomes their duty to reach an agreement regarding the patient`s decisions and care.

If such substitutes cannot develop consensus, the doctor examines the majority of active substances in this category. [14] To decide for himself, the patient must be competent. This means that the patient must be aware and able to choose the option they deem best for their health and well-being. In any case, this must be filled first. However, there are some exceptions. Some states have passed laws that allow incompetent patients with certified mental illness to speak for themselves in terms of decision-making. [1] Twenty-two states have established legal solutions to disputes between several potential alternative decision-makers, 14 advocating a “majority rule” approach when surrogates disagree with equal priority, and 7 requiring consensus for care decisions. In the presence of multiple potential surrogates, West Virginia allows “the attending physician or advanced nurse.

choose. the person who reasonably appears to be the most qualified,” theoretically circumvents the need for subsequent conflict resolution. The treating provider may even approve a person who is “ranked lower priority if that person is the most qualified at its discretion. to replace the person with a disability. 11 In the event of an impasse, some states establish advanced dispute resolution procedures, such as deferring doctors` opinions or referring them to an impartial hospital committee or probate court. A substitute decision-maker must use the substitute judgment doctrine to approve or reject health care on behalf of an incapable person. All surrogates, whether appointed by the person, by default or by the court, are required to follow the express wishes of the adult and act in the best interests of the person, taking into account the person`s values, if known. In the absence of living wills, the representative should apply the substitute judgment principle, taking into account what the patient would want in the given situation. This may require further discussions with others who knew the patient prior to the current incapacity for work. [1] [17] The reasons for refuting the authority of a failing surrogate mother vary considerably. Five of the 35 States with mandatory hierarchy describe an out-of-court procedure to challenge a legally derived default surrogate; In other States, such a rebuttal would fall within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.

Illinois includes a provision for the replacement of a standard surrogate mother who is “not available.” upon reasonable request”, but neither availability nor reasonable demand is further defined. Even among states that allow amicable appeals, courts provide a last resort for anyone to challenge the authority of a standard surrogate. We therefore assessed the relevant laws we identified in parallel searches with two legal databases: LexisNexis and Fastcase. Search terms included “living will,” “living will,” “surrogate,” “health care decisions,” and “power of attorney for health care.” Health, safety, insurance and estate laws were assessed through sequential and independent reviews. All statutes analyzed were in force in their jurisdictions as of March 31, 2016. 4. It doesn`t hurt to postpone the decision. Often, the postponement of the decision to keep a person on life support shifts resources and funds. The report begins by defining a number of terms related to health guidelines before presenting the theoretical frameworks used in decision-making for incapacitated patients. It then provides a protocol for identifying a surrogate decision-maker, as well as guidance for physicians who may conflict, either to assist the surrogate in decision-making or in the decision itself.

Finally, the report provides guidelines for maintaining an effective physician-substitute decision-maker relationship. [1] Current legal solutions include living wills or living wills that explain the patient`s wishes in certain medical situations. A standing power of attorney for health care (DPA/HC) and is another way to identify a patient`s last wishes through a lawyer. The Patient Self-Determination Act stipulates that hospitals and health facilities must provide information on living wills and DPA/SC. In addition, an agent or substitute decision-maker may communicate these last wishes to the physician or nursing team if there is no DPA/SC or AD. In addition, it is unclear whether patient care or other decision-making outcomes for patients with disabilities vary in tandem with state laws. Several key issues need to be addressed: how often replacement drivers are called and at what stage they tend to be followed; the reasons why other potential decision-makers are rejected in practice; and the prevalence and outcomes of out-of-court challenges.