Substituted Judgment and The Paradigm Case Mistake

2025/02/17 by Daniel Brudney · 1 voice
Health Professions · Medicine · #Ethics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare #Ethics in medical practice #Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues

paper · doi:10.1080/15265161.2025.2457711

openalex publication_date 2025/02/17 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/06/15

Abstract

Substituted judgment is widely used at the bedside, but the moral value that underpins its use needs examination. I argue that this value is the value of leading an authentic life. I then argue that an authentic life has multiple axes and that patients (like all human beings) vary widely in how they score on these axes. This entails that the moral weight of the value of authenticity in bedside decision-making also varies widely. And that means that, at the bedside, substituted judgment should not be seen as a moral trump. Put differently, when a surrogate must make a bedside decision, the answer to the "What would the patient choose?" question should not be morally decisive for that decision. The answer to that question should be a part, but only a part, of a more complex decision-making process.

Citations

• Hypothetical Consent and the Value(s) of Autonomy

Discussions

• Substituted judgment in surrogate decision-making rests on a shaky moral assumption: authenticity. Since patients differ in how “authentic” their lives are, “what the patient would want” can’t always [bsky, 1 points, 1 comments]

Related

• Capacity for Preferences:Respecting Patients with Compromised Decision‐Making
• Judgement and the role of the metaphysics of values in medical ethics
• The disunity of moral judgment: Evidence and implications
• Dissolving the moral-conventional distinction
• The experience of surrogate decision‐making and deciphering critically ill patient values: A qualitative study