Résumés
Abstract
As older people begin to develop dementia, we confront ethical questions about when and how to intervene in their increasingly compromised decision-making. The prevailing approach in bioethics to tackling this challenge has been to develop theories of “decision-making capacity” based on the same characteristics that entitle the decisions of moral persons to respect in general. This article argues that this way of thinking about the problem has missed the point. Because the disposition of property is an identity-dependent right, what matters in dementia and decision-making is an individual’s personal identity with their prior self, not their moral personhood. Therefore, in considering when and how we ought to intervene in the decision-making of those with dementia, we must look to the philosophy of personal identity rather than personhood.
Keywords:
- dementia,
- decision-making,
- law,
- personal identity,
- property,
- competence,
- capacity
Résumé
Lorsque les personnes âgées commencent à souffrir de démence, nous sommes confrontés à des questions éthiques sur le moment et la manière d’intervenir dans leur processus décisionnel de plus en plus compromis. L’approche dominante en bioéthique pour relever ce défi a consisté à élaborer des théories de la « capacité de décision » fondées sur les mêmes caractéristiques qui donnent droit au respect des décisions des personnes morales en général. Cet article soutient que cette façon d’envisager le problème est passée à côté de l’essentiel. Parce que la disposition des biens est un droit dépendant de l’identité, ce qui compte dans la démence et la prise de décision est l’identité personnelle d’un individu avec son moi antérieur, et non son statut de personne morale. Par conséquent, pour savoir quand et comment nous devons intervenir dans la prise de décision des personnes atteintes de démence, nous devons nous tourner vers la philosophie de l’identité personnelle plutôt que de l’individualité.
Mots-clés :
- démence,
- prise de décision,
- droit,
- identité personnelle,
- propriété,
- compétence,
- capacité
Veuillez télécharger l’article en PDF pour le lire.
Télécharger
Parties annexes
Acknowledgements / Remerciements
The author thanks the Harvard Summer Academic Fellowship for the resources to write this paper, and Chris Havasy, Mark Satta, and Adam Todd Bendorf for reading the draft and providing helpful comments.
L’auteur remercie la Harvard Summer Academic Fellowship pour les ressources nécessaires à la rédaction de cet article, ainsi que Chris Havasy, Mark Satta et Adam Todd Bendorf pour avoir lu la version préliminaire et fourni des commentaires utiles.
Bibliography
- 1. Alzheimer’s Association. Alzheimer’s Disease Facts and Figures. Chicago: Alzheimer’s Association; 2021.
- 2. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). Recommendations and Report for Financial Institutions on Preventing and Responding to Elder Financial Exploitation. Washington, D.C.; Mar 2016.
- 3. Ebmeier KP, Filippini N, Mackay CE, Suri S & Valkanova V. Functional brain imaging and connectivity in dementia. In: Ames D, O’Brien J, Burns A, editors. Dementia. 5th ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2017. p. 127-138.
- 4. Conn D, Snowdon J, Purandare N. Residential care for people with dementia. In: Ames D, O’Brien J, Burns A, editors. Dementia. 5th ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2017. p. 312-323.
- 5. Arias JJ. A time to step in: legal mechanisms for protecting those with declining capacity. American Journal of Law & Medicine. 2013;39(1):134-59.
- 6. Buchanan A, Brock DW. Deciding for Others: The Ethics of Surrogate Decision Making. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1989.
- 7. Kitwood T. Dementia Reconsidered: The Person Comes First. New York: Open University Press; 1997.
- 8. Jaworska A. Respecting the margins of agency: alzheimer’s patients and the capacity to value. Philosophy & Public Affairs. 1999;28(2):105-138.
- 9. Etchells, E, Darzins P, Siberfield M, et al. Assessment of patient capacity to consent. Journal of General Internal Medicine 1999;14(1):27-34.
- 10. Tan JOA, Steward A, Hope T. Decision-making as a broader concept. Philosophy, Psychiatry, & Psychology. 2009;16(4):345-349.
- 11. Pietrzykowski T. Personhood Beyond Humanism: Animals, Chimeras, Autonomous Agents:7. New York: Springer; 2018.
- 12. Taylor C. Human Agency and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1985.
- 13. Spaemann R. Persons: The Difference between ‘Someone’ and ‘Something’: 9. Oxford: Oxford University Press; trans. Oliver O’Donovan; 2006.
- 14. Unger P. Identity, Consciousness and Value. New York: Oxford University Press; 1990.
- 15. Singer P. Practical Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1979.
- 16. Beauchamp TL. The Failure of theories of personhood. In: Thomasma DC, Weisstub D, Herve C, editors. Personhood and Healthcare. New York: Springer; 2001. p. 59-69.
- 17. Kant I. Grounding of the Metaphysics of Morals. 3rd ed. James W. Ellington, translator. Indianapolis: Hackett; 1993.
- 18. Mill JS. Autobiography. Coss JJ, editor. New York: Columbia University Press; 1924.
- 19. White BC. Competence to Consent. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press; 1994.
- 20. Dennett DC. Conditions of personhood. In: Rorty, AO, editor. The Identities of Persons. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1976.
- 21. Harris J. The concept of the person and the value of life. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal. 1999;9(4):293-308.
- 22. Devettere RJ. Practical Decision Making in Health Care Ethics: Cases and Concepts. 2nd ed. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press; 2000.
- 23. Banks v Goodfellow (1870) LR 5 QB 549.
- 24. Wright MS. Dementia, autonomy, and supported healthcare decisionmaking. Maryland Law Review. 2020;79(2):257-324.
- 25. Paine v Sullivan (Mass. Ct. App. 2011) 950 N.E.2d 8784; In re Estate of Lynch (Tex. Ct. App. 2011) 350 S.W.3d 130; Matter of Estate of Giaquinto (N.Y. App. Div. 2018) 164 A.D.3d 1527.
- 26. Appelbaum PS, Grisso T. Assessing patients’ capacities to consent to treatment. New England Journal of Medicine. 1988;319(25):1635-1638.
- 27. Liao MS. Designing humans: a human rights approach. Bioethics. 2019;33(1):98-104.
- 28. Dworkin R. Life’s Dominion: An Argument about Abortion, Euthanasia, and Individual Freedom. New York: Vintage; 1993.
- 29. Iliffe S, Manthorpe J, Drennan D. Dementia care in the community: Challenges for primary health and social care. In: Ames D, Burns A, O’Brien J, editors, Dementia. 4th Ed. London : Hodder Arnold; 2010. p. 157-165.
- 30. Manthrope J. Decisions, decisions: linking personalization to person-centred care. In: O’Connor D, Purves B. editors. Decision Making, Personhood, and Dementia: Exploring the Interface. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers; 2009. p. 99-105.
- 31. Sabat SR. Voices of Alzheimer’s disease sufferers: a call for treatment based on personhood. Journal of Clinical Ethics. 1998;9(1):35-48.
- 32. Kittay EF. At the margins of moral personhood. Ethics 2005;116(1):100-131.
- 33. Diller R. Legal capacity for all: including older persons in the shift from adult guardianship to supported decision-making. Fordham Urban Law Journal. 2016;43(3):495-538.
- 34. United Nations. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. 2007. Art. 12.
- 35. Kong C. The space between second-person respect and rational care in theory and mental health law. Law and Philosophy. 2015;34(4):433-467.
- 36. Pinker S. The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature. New York: Penguin Books; 2002.
- 37. Plomin R. Blueprint: How DNA Makes Us Who We Are. Cambridge: The MIT Press; 2018.
- 38. Parfit D. Reasons and Persons. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1984.
- 39. DeGrazia D. Human Identity and Bioethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2005.
- 40. Shoemaker S, Swinburne R. Personal Identity. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell; 1984.
- 41. Matthews JHD, Bok H, Rabins PV. Personal Identity and Fractured Selves. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 2009.
- 42. Schechtman M. The Constitution of Selves. Ithaca: Cornell University Press; 1996.
- 43. Noonan H. Introduction. In: Noonan H, editor. Personal Identity. Abington-on-Thames: Routledge; 1993.
- 44. Locke J. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding: Chap. XXVII, § 9. 1689
- 45. Williams B. The self and the future. Philosophical Review. 1970;79(2):161-180.
- 46. Wallace K. The Network Self: Relation, Process, and Personal Identity. Oxford: Routledge, 2019.
- 47. Buchanan, A. Advance directives and the personal identity problem. Philosophy & Public Affairs. 1988;17(4):277-302.
- 48. Radin MJ. Property and personhood. Stanford Law Review. 1982;34(5):967-1015.
- 49. Jones JD. Property and personhood revisited. Wake Forest Journal of Law & Policy. 2011;1(1):127-128.
- 50. Erde EL. Personhood: the vain and pointless quest for a definition: an ordinary language exploration. In: Thomasma DC, Weisstub DN, Herve C, editors. Personhood and Healthcare. New York: Springer; 2001. p. 70-89.
- 51. Schloendorff v Society of New York Hospital (N.Y. 1914)105 N.E. 92..
- 52. American Law Institute. Restatement (Second) of Agency: s 1. Philadelphia: American Law Institute; 1958.
- 53. Zacchini v Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co. (1977) 433 U.S. 562..
- 54. American Law Institute. Restatement (Second) of Torts: s 525. Philadelphia: American Law Institute; 1965.
- 55. American Law Institute. Restatement (Second) of Contracts s 12(2). Philadelphia: American Law Institute; 1981.
- 56. Sitkoff RH, Dukeminier J. Wills, Trusts and Estates. 10th ed. Riverwoods, IL: Aspen; 2017.
- 57. Moye J, Marson DC, Edelson B. Assessment of capacity in an aging society. American Psychologist 2013;68(3):158-171.
- 58. Kaiser Aetna v United States (1975) 444 U.S. 164, 176.
- 59. Merrill TW. Property and the right to exclude. Nebraska Law Review. 1998;77(4):730-755.
- 60. United States Code, eff. 1996 (U.S.) Title 18, s 661.
- 61. New York State Penal Law, 2021 (N.Y.), Art. 190.
- 62. California Civil Code, 2021 (CA) s. 3344(a).
- 63. Deutsche Morgan Grenfell v IRC [2007] 1 AC 558.
- 64. Parfit D. Why our identity is not what matters. In Martin R, Barresi, J, editors. Personal Identity. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell; 2003.
- 65. Brassington I. On rights of inheritance and bequest. The Journal of Ethics. 2019;23(2):119-142.
- 66. Doebbler C. Introduction to International Human Rights Law. CD Publishing; 2006. p. 141-142.
- 67. Johnson DR. Reflections on the bundle of rights. Vermont Law Review. 2007;32:247-272.
- 68. Nozick R. Anarchy, State, and Utopia. New York: Basic Books; 1974.
- 69. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Art. 17.
- 70. Francis LP. Decisionmaking at the end of life: patients with Alzheimer’s or other dementias. Georgia Law Review. 2001;35(2):539-92.
- 71. Matsumura KT. Binding future selves. Louisiana Law Review. 2014;75(1):71-125.