When Voluntary Stopping of Eating and Drinking in Advanced Dementia Is No Longer Voluntary

Elizabeth Chuang, Lauren Sydney Flicker

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

In “On Avoiding Deep Dementia,” Norman Cantor astutely notes that, for some individuals, the concept of “protracted maintenance during progressive cognitive dysfunction and helplessness is an intolerably degrading prospect.” This cannot be argued with. Cantor's solution, however—that in the wake of a dementia diagnosis, patients should have the option to direct, in advance, instructions for voluntary stopping of eating and drinking should they develop a state of deep dementia—is more ethically challenging than it may first appear. Respect for autonomy is one of the most fundamental principles of bioethics, and it requires that we allow patients with capacity to refuse life-sustaining treatment, even when that treatment is something as seemingly innocuous as nutrition and hydration. If a capacitated person uses an advance directive to prospectively refuse artificial nutrition or hydration, then that treatment must be withheld if the person develops dementia and loses the ability or willingness to eat. Cantor is incorrect, however, in suggesting that an advance directive can require that nutrition and hydration be withheld from a patient with dementia who actively requests to eat or drink. Regardless of the language in an advance directive, caregivers cannot be compelled to abandon their duty to attend to the person's human dignity, nor can physicians be compelled to sedate a person with moderate or severe dementia because that person continues to be receptive to eating and drinking.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)24-25
Number of pages2
JournalHastings Center Report
Volume48
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2018

Fingerprint

eating behavior
dementia
Drinking
Dementia
Advance Directives
Eating
human being
nutrition
Personhood
Bioethics
human dignity
Aptitude
bioethics
Caregivers
caregiver
respect
Language
Therapeutics
autonomy
Maintenance

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health(social science)
  • Issues, ethics and legal aspects
  • Philosophy
  • Health Policy

Cite this

When Voluntary Stopping of Eating and Drinking in Advanced Dementia Is No Longer Voluntary. / Chuang, Elizabeth; Flicker, Lauren Sydney.

In: Hastings Center Report, Vol. 48, No. 4, 01.07.2018, p. 24-25.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{37d34d412e31468b88e88b3951e477c5,
title = "When Voluntary Stopping of Eating and Drinking in Advanced Dementia Is No Longer Voluntary",
abstract = "In “On Avoiding Deep Dementia,” Norman Cantor astutely notes that, for some individuals, the concept of “protracted maintenance during progressive cognitive dysfunction and helplessness is an intolerably degrading prospect.” This cannot be argued with. Cantor's solution, however—that in the wake of a dementia diagnosis, patients should have the option to direct, in advance, instructions for voluntary stopping of eating and drinking should they develop a state of deep dementia—is more ethically challenging than it may first appear. Respect for autonomy is one of the most fundamental principles of bioethics, and it requires that we allow patients with capacity to refuse life-sustaining treatment, even when that treatment is something as seemingly innocuous as nutrition and hydration. If a capacitated person uses an advance directive to prospectively refuse artificial nutrition or hydration, then that treatment must be withheld if the person develops dementia and loses the ability or willingness to eat. Cantor is incorrect, however, in suggesting that an advance directive can require that nutrition and hydration be withheld from a patient with dementia who actively requests to eat or drink. Regardless of the language in an advance directive, caregivers cannot be compelled to abandon their duty to attend to the person's human dignity, nor can physicians be compelled to sedate a person with moderate or severe dementia because that person continues to be receptive to eating and drinking.",
author = "Elizabeth Chuang and Flicker, {Lauren Sydney}",
year = "2018",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/hast.866",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "48",
pages = "24--25",
journal = "Hastings Center Report",
issn = "0093-0334",
publisher = "Hastings Center",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - When Voluntary Stopping of Eating and Drinking in Advanced Dementia Is No Longer Voluntary

AU - Chuang, Elizabeth

AU - Flicker, Lauren Sydney

PY - 2018/7/1

Y1 - 2018/7/1

N2 - In “On Avoiding Deep Dementia,” Norman Cantor astutely notes that, for some individuals, the concept of “protracted maintenance during progressive cognitive dysfunction and helplessness is an intolerably degrading prospect.” This cannot be argued with. Cantor's solution, however—that in the wake of a dementia diagnosis, patients should have the option to direct, in advance, instructions for voluntary stopping of eating and drinking should they develop a state of deep dementia—is more ethically challenging than it may first appear. Respect for autonomy is one of the most fundamental principles of bioethics, and it requires that we allow patients with capacity to refuse life-sustaining treatment, even when that treatment is something as seemingly innocuous as nutrition and hydration. If a capacitated person uses an advance directive to prospectively refuse artificial nutrition or hydration, then that treatment must be withheld if the person develops dementia and loses the ability or willingness to eat. Cantor is incorrect, however, in suggesting that an advance directive can require that nutrition and hydration be withheld from a patient with dementia who actively requests to eat or drink. Regardless of the language in an advance directive, caregivers cannot be compelled to abandon their duty to attend to the person's human dignity, nor can physicians be compelled to sedate a person with moderate or severe dementia because that person continues to be receptive to eating and drinking.

AB - In “On Avoiding Deep Dementia,” Norman Cantor astutely notes that, for some individuals, the concept of “protracted maintenance during progressive cognitive dysfunction and helplessness is an intolerably degrading prospect.” This cannot be argued with. Cantor's solution, however—that in the wake of a dementia diagnosis, patients should have the option to direct, in advance, instructions for voluntary stopping of eating and drinking should they develop a state of deep dementia—is more ethically challenging than it may first appear. Respect for autonomy is one of the most fundamental principles of bioethics, and it requires that we allow patients with capacity to refuse life-sustaining treatment, even when that treatment is something as seemingly innocuous as nutrition and hydration. If a capacitated person uses an advance directive to prospectively refuse artificial nutrition or hydration, then that treatment must be withheld if the person develops dementia and loses the ability or willingness to eat. Cantor is incorrect, however, in suggesting that an advance directive can require that nutrition and hydration be withheld from a patient with dementia who actively requests to eat or drink. Regardless of the language in an advance directive, caregivers cannot be compelled to abandon their duty to attend to the person's human dignity, nor can physicians be compelled to sedate a person with moderate or severe dementia because that person continues to be receptive to eating and drinking.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85051651715&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85051651715&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/hast.866

DO - 10.1002/hast.866

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85051651715

VL - 48

SP - 24

EP - 25

JO - Hastings Center Report

JF - Hastings Center Report

SN - 0093-0334

IS - 4

ER -