View/Open - Scholarly Commons Home
View/Open - Scholarly Commons Home
View/Open - Scholarly Commons Home
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
denied there was any ethical component to this decision. Instead, the decision was<br />
described as a ‘clinically based’ and relied heavily on set guidelines and medical<br />
evidence. These denials epitomise the problems with best interest determinations made<br />
in medical and legal contexts – entrenched perceptions that they can be made without<br />
recourse to values.<br />
To challenge this perception, it is necessary to strip away centuries of positivist legal<br />
process and medical, fact centred approaches, and start with a basic understanding of<br />
how an ethically complex decision like withdrawing life sustaining treatment is made.<br />
Seedhouse’s rational fields theory offers a comprehensive and realistic theory of<br />
decision making. I use it as the basic theoretical framework with which to advance my<br />
argument.<br />
I start by considering perceptions about value-free decision making. I then set out the<br />
main points of the rational fields theory, following which I apply the model to best<br />
interest determinations. I finish by considering how the additional understanding and<br />
clarity provided resolves important philosophical questions and offers practical<br />
solutions to enhance decision making.<br />
Existing foundations<br />
Obviously evidence and values are intertwined. Obviously all decisions<br />
are a balance of evidence and values. Obviously we should regard our<br />
values as at least equally important as evidence. And yet we don’t.<br />
It isn’t particularly easy to understand why. We know we value. We<br />
know we are passionate creatures. And yet we want more and more<br />
evidence and less and less values in our decision-making.<br />
Seedhouse, 2005, p 23<br />
Best interest determinations take place within legal and medical contexts which are<br />
underpinned by philosophical frameworks which aim to achieve neutrality and<br />
eliminate the individual values of decision makers. The medical model is traditionally<br />
based on scientific method and essentially ‘fact-centred’. For example, the current push<br />
for evidence based medicine places perspective-free information such as ‘meta-analyses<br />
188