Physician understanding and application of surrogate decision-making laws in clinical practice

Amber Rose Comer, Margaret Gaffney, Cynthia L. Stone, Alexia Torke

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Although state surrogate laws are the most common way surrogate decision makers are identified, no studies have been conducted to determine physician understanding of these laws or how these laws are utilized during clinical practice. The purpose of this study is to better understand how surrogate decision-making laws function in practice. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 412 physicians working in Indiana hospitals was conducted between November 2014 and January 2015 to determine physicians' knowledge of Indiana's surrogate decision-making law and physicians' approaches to hypothetical cases using the law in clinical practice. Results: Fewer than half of physicians (48%) were able to correctly identify all legally allowable surrogate decision makers. Of those physicians who knew the law, nearly all of them (98%) indicated that they would violate the law during clinical practice by allowing nonlegal surrogates such as grandchildren to make medical decisions. Conclusions: A majority of physicians endorse relying on surrogates who have strong ties to the patient but are not legally allowable in Indiana. It is possible that these decisions reflect sound ethical reasoning even though they are illegal. Due to the narrow construction of some state surrogate decision laws, physicians may be placed in the position where they must either choose to follow medical ethical principles or the law. To alleviate these issues, state surrogate decision laws need to be amended to include a broader list of surrogates, such as extended family and close friends.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1-7
Number of pages7
JournalAJOB Empirical Bioethics
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Oct 20 2016

Fingerprint

Decision Making
physician
Physicians
decision making
Law
decision maker
Clinical Practice
grandchild
extended family
Cross-Sectional Studies

Keywords

  • bioethics
  • empirical research
  • health policy
  • policy analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health(social science)
  • Philosophy
  • Health Policy

Cite this

Physician understanding and application of surrogate decision-making laws in clinical practice. / Comer, Amber Rose; Gaffney, Margaret; Stone, Cynthia L.; Torke, Alexia.

In: AJOB Empirical Bioethics, 20.10.2016, p. 1-7.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{183cc89b3aaa4fa695e121a055029703,
title = "Physician understanding and application of surrogate decision-making laws in clinical practice",
abstract = "Background: Although state surrogate laws are the most common way surrogate decision makers are identified, no studies have been conducted to determine physician understanding of these laws or how these laws are utilized during clinical practice. The purpose of this study is to better understand how surrogate decision-making laws function in practice. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 412 physicians working in Indiana hospitals was conducted between November 2014 and January 2015 to determine physicians' knowledge of Indiana's surrogate decision-making law and physicians' approaches to hypothetical cases using the law in clinical practice. Results: Fewer than half of physicians (48{\%}) were able to correctly identify all legally allowable surrogate decision makers. Of those physicians who knew the law, nearly all of them (98{\%}) indicated that they would violate the law during clinical practice by allowing nonlegal surrogates such as grandchildren to make medical decisions. Conclusions: A majority of physicians endorse relying on surrogates who have strong ties to the patient but are not legally allowable in Indiana. It is possible that these decisions reflect sound ethical reasoning even though they are illegal. Due to the narrow construction of some state surrogate decision laws, physicians may be placed in the position where they must either choose to follow medical ethical principles or the law. To alleviate these issues, state surrogate decision laws need to be amended to include a broader list of surrogates, such as extended family and close friends.",
keywords = "bioethics, empirical research, health policy, policy analysis",
author = "Comer, {Amber Rose} and Margaret Gaffney and Stone, {Cynthia L.} and Alexia Torke",
year = "2016",
month = "10",
day = "20",
doi = "10.1080/23294515.2016.1234520",
language = "English (US)",
pages = "1--7",
journal = "AJOB Empirical Bioethics",
issn = "2329-4515",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Physician understanding and application of surrogate decision-making laws in clinical practice

AU - Comer, Amber Rose

AU - Gaffney, Margaret

AU - Stone, Cynthia L.

AU - Torke, Alexia

PY - 2016/10/20

Y1 - 2016/10/20

N2 - Background: Although state surrogate laws are the most common way surrogate decision makers are identified, no studies have been conducted to determine physician understanding of these laws or how these laws are utilized during clinical practice. The purpose of this study is to better understand how surrogate decision-making laws function in practice. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 412 physicians working in Indiana hospitals was conducted between November 2014 and January 2015 to determine physicians' knowledge of Indiana's surrogate decision-making law and physicians' approaches to hypothetical cases using the law in clinical practice. Results: Fewer than half of physicians (48%) were able to correctly identify all legally allowable surrogate decision makers. Of those physicians who knew the law, nearly all of them (98%) indicated that they would violate the law during clinical practice by allowing nonlegal surrogates such as grandchildren to make medical decisions. Conclusions: A majority of physicians endorse relying on surrogates who have strong ties to the patient but are not legally allowable in Indiana. It is possible that these decisions reflect sound ethical reasoning even though they are illegal. Due to the narrow construction of some state surrogate decision laws, physicians may be placed in the position where they must either choose to follow medical ethical principles or the law. To alleviate these issues, state surrogate decision laws need to be amended to include a broader list of surrogates, such as extended family and close friends.

AB - Background: Although state surrogate laws are the most common way surrogate decision makers are identified, no studies have been conducted to determine physician understanding of these laws or how these laws are utilized during clinical practice. The purpose of this study is to better understand how surrogate decision-making laws function in practice. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 412 physicians working in Indiana hospitals was conducted between November 2014 and January 2015 to determine physicians' knowledge of Indiana's surrogate decision-making law and physicians' approaches to hypothetical cases using the law in clinical practice. Results: Fewer than half of physicians (48%) were able to correctly identify all legally allowable surrogate decision makers. Of those physicians who knew the law, nearly all of them (98%) indicated that they would violate the law during clinical practice by allowing nonlegal surrogates such as grandchildren to make medical decisions. Conclusions: A majority of physicians endorse relying on surrogates who have strong ties to the patient but are not legally allowable in Indiana. It is possible that these decisions reflect sound ethical reasoning even though they are illegal. Due to the narrow construction of some state surrogate decision laws, physicians may be placed in the position where they must either choose to follow medical ethical principles or the law. To alleviate these issues, state surrogate decision laws need to be amended to include a broader list of surrogates, such as extended family and close friends.

KW - bioethics

KW - empirical research

KW - health policy

KW - policy analysis

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84992088221&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84992088221&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/23294515.2016.1234520

DO - 10.1080/23294515.2016.1234520

M3 - Article

SP - 1

EP - 7

JO - AJOB Empirical Bioethics

JF - AJOB Empirical Bioethics

SN - 2329-4515

ER -