Scholarlink

<p>This article draws upon the work of disability bioethicists to offer additional reflections on how and why conflicts sometimes emerge between the surrogates of disabled patients and health care practitioners. The Best Interest Values (BIV) system described by Fiester can lead to, or coincide with, ableist attitudes that endanger the lives and dignity of disabled people. At the same time, her competing hierarchies could do a better job distinguishing quality of life concerns from vitalism, the latter of which does not well represent many disability advocates’ concerns regarding healthcare systems. The article concludes by arguing that acquiescing to surrogate demands and legal requirements to prolong the lives of disabled patients can lead to inhumane treatment plans that ought to be resisted by health care practitioners.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Disability, Quality of Life, and Vitalism in End-of-Life Care

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年10月15日

查看全文
  • Devan Stahl

摘要

This article draws upon the work of disability bioethicists to offer additional reflections on how and why conflicts sometimes emerge between the surrogates of disabled patients and health care practitioners. The Best Interest Values (BIV) system described by Fiester can lead to, or coincide with, ableist attitudes that endanger the lives and dignity of disabled people. At the same time, her competing hierarchies could do a better job distinguishing quality of life concerns from vitalism, the latter of which does not well represent many disability advocates’ concerns regarding healthcare systems. The article concludes by arguing that acquiescing to surrogate demands and legal requirements to prolong the lives of disabled patients can lead to inhumane treatment plans that ought to be resisted by health care practitioners.