Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Abstract

While digital advance directives, such as the P4 system, have been presented as promising alternatives to surrogate decision-making, these systems have also faced criticism for being potentially misguided and even unethical. In this presentation, I critically examine two objections to the dominant emphasis on the loss of autonomous choice, with the aim of re-evaluating the philosophical foundations of digital advance directives through the lens of family ethics. First, I analyse how the debate surrounding digital advance directives is misleading in its focus on proxy decision-making as merely a matter of reproducing preferences. This narrow conception of autonomy overlooks the fact that such decisions often involve shared agency and familial responsibility. Second, I argue that the current literature largely ignores issues of social and epistemic injustice—concerns that cannot be dismissed in the ethical evaluation of these technologies. The presentation concludes by addressing a potential objection: that incorporating a family ethics perspective might reinforce irrational preferences for maintaining the status quo.

 

Join from Zoom