Premium
Abstracts
Author(s) -
Michelle Jenkins,
M Puopolo,
Katia Serruto,
Prue Lamerton,
Kate Anderson,
Lenice Emblin,
Michael Jost,
Nikki-Louise Scott,
Kunthi Pathmaraj,
Jessica Nicole Welch,
J. R. Bradley,
Anthony Wallace,
Graeme O’Keefe,
Sam Berlangieri,
Andrew Scott,
Austin Health,
G. Roff,
Andrew Rose,
Wm. Douglas,
Clayton Mackey,
Hans Frater,
Sithoeun Sam,
Peter Peralta,
R. A. Oakley,
Michael Lin,
J. Chu,
Bridget Chappell,
Timothy Saunder,
Rebecca Herbertson,
Niall C. Tebbutt,
Lee Weng Fook,
Sze Lee
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
internal medicine journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.596
H-Index - 70
eISSN - 1445-5994
pISSN - 1444-0903
DOI - 10.1111/j.1445-5994.2009.0s0001.x
Subject(s) - medicine , citation , library science , computer science
The Australian Medical Association has recently adopted a policy position concerning advance care planning, which is generally supportive of extending patient self-determination beyond the loss of decision-making capacity. It calls for uniform national legislation for legally enforceable advance health directives (AHD), and statutory protection for practitioners who comply with valid AHD, or who do not comply on several grounds. Analysis of the grounds for non-compliance indicate that they undermine patient autonomy, and aspects of the policy are inconsistent with current common law and statutory regimes that allow an adult to complete a legally binding AHD. The policy therefore threatens the patient self-determination, which it endorses, and places doctors who participate in advance care planning at legal risk