IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/medlaw/v29y2021i3p497-523..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Family Involvement in the End-of-Life Decision-Making Process: Legal and Bioethical Analysis of Empirical Findings

Author

Listed:
  • Nili Karako-Eyal
  • Roy Gilbar

Abstract

End-of-life decision making involves clinicians, patients, and relatives; yet, the law in Israel hardly recognises the role of relatives. This raises the question of the law’s impact in practice and, hence, whether it should be amended. This issue is examined on the basis of findings from a qualitative, interview-based study conducted in Israel among relatives of dying patients. The findings indicate that there are areas in which clinicians and relatives do not adhere to the law in the end-of-life decision-making process. For example, they do not always ascertain the patient's end-of-life preferences, which ignores a patient's right to autonomy and their right to make informed decisions. The apparent gaps between the actual conduct of clinicians and relatives on the one hand and the directives of the Israeli Dying Patient Act 2005 on the other, lead us to propose several changes to the Act.

Suggested Citation

  • Nili Karako-Eyal & Roy Gilbar, 2021. "Family Involvement in the End-of-Life Decision-Making Process: Legal and Bioethical Analysis of Empirical Findings," Medical Law Review, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(3), pages 497-523.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:medlaw:v:29:y:2021:i:3:p:497-523.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/medlaw/fwab032
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:medlaw:v:29:y:2021:i:3:p:497-523.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/medlaw .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.