Offering the “Reasonable Interests Standard”

in Response to Ross’s Analysis of the Best Interests Standard

 

D. Micah Hester, The Journal of Clinical Ethics 30, no. 3 (Fall 2019): 196-200.

 

Ross’s argument against the best interest standard (BIS) makes a clear case for the problems of the BIS, and she also notes challenges with such notions as the harm principle. In light of these critiques, Ross champions her longstanding pediatric moral norm for decision making, constrained parental autonomy (CPA). This article argues that while Ross’s critique of the traditional accounts of the BIS is correct, her solution still raises some concerns. As such, I offer the “reasonable interests standard” as a way of addressing what I see as weaknesses in both the BIS and CPA.

 

$35.00

This .pdf file may be viewed, downloaded, and/or printed for personal use only.

Access to this .pdf will end when you close the file.

 

Terms and conditions:

You have purchased one-time access to a .pdf of this article.

Purchasers may not:

• Distribute a copy of the article, online or in print, without the express written permission of JCE.

• Post the article online in any way.
• Charge another party for a copy of the article.

 

Click here to return to The Journal of Clinical Ethics homepage.

 

This .pdf file may be viewed, downloaded, and/or printed for personal use only.

Access to this .pdf will end when you close the file.