ABSTRACT
Resumen: La Ley Nº 18.473 y el Decreto que la reglamenta (385/013) fueron concebidos con la finalidad de dar un marco normativo a la posibilidad que tiene una persona de establecer sus preferencias sobre ciertos actos médicos cuando todavía es capaz de consentir, ejerciendo su autonomía de manera anticipada ante la eventual pérdida de capacidad de decisión. Por lo tanto, el hecho de llevar a cabo o no un procedimiento médico no dependerá de la capacidad de consentir de la persona en ese momento, esto es lo que la diferencia del consentimiento informado habitual.
Abstract: Act 18.473 and Decree 385/013 which regulates it, were intended to provide a normative framework for individuals to state their preferences about certain medical acts when they are still capable of consenting to them, exercising their autonomy in advance, in light of the potential loss of their decision-making capacity. Therefore, the fact of performing or not a medical act, will not depend on the consent capacity of the individual at that precise moment, what differentiates it from the regular informed consent. This article aims to analyse the possible inconsistencies between what the law intended to achieve and what is actually authorized today. Certain aspects studied could at least partially explain why this norm is still very hard to enforce even after being effective for over 12 years.
Resumo: A Lei nº 18.473 e o Decreto que a regulamenta (385/013) foram concebidos com o objetivo de dar um marco normativo à possibilidade de uma pessoa estabelecer suas preferências em relação a determinados atos médicos quando ainda está em condições de consentir; exercer previamente a sua autonomia perante a eventual perda da capacidade de decisão. Portanto, a realização ou não de um procedimento médico não dependerá da capacidade da pessoa de consentir naquele momento; isso é o que o torna diferente do consentimento informado usual. O objetivo deste artigo é analisar as possíveis discrepâncias que existem entre o que se pretendia alcançar ao criar a lei e o que realmente pode ser feito. Certos aspectos analisados poderiam explicar, pelo menos em parte, por que essa lei, que já tem mais de 12 anos de sua promulgação, continua sendo muito difícil de implementar.
Subject(s)
Living Wills/legislation & jurisprudenceABSTRACT
La discrepancia que genera la institución de las instrucciones previas se aprecia en distintos niveles -ético, jurídico social-, y alcanza incluso al ámbito terminológico, esto es, los términos empleados para referirse a esta institución no son en absoluto pacíficos o unívocos: desde testamentos vitales, voluntades o directivas anticipadas, deseos expresados anteriormente, etc., lo que lleva a cierta confusión sobre si se trata o no de la misma figura y a cierta inseguridad jurídica, ámbito por cierto sumamente prolijo en este sentido. No obstante la abundante legislación y doctrina sobre el particular, existe poca información acerca de la forma de registrar el documento, la posibilidad de consultarlo o los límites para su cumplimiento. Este artículo trata de ofrecer mayor luz al respecto, en el seno de la normativa española.
The discrepancy generated by advanced directives is observed in several levels -ethical, legal and social-, and reaches even the terminological field, that is, the terms employed to refer to the issue are not distinct or indifferent at all: from living will to advanced directives to wishes previously expressed, etc., which confers some confusion about whether it refers to the same issue or to some legal insecurity, field otherwise very complex in this sense. In spite of the abundant legislation and doctrine about the issue, there is little information about the way to register the document, the possibility to consult it and the limits about its fulfillment. This article tries to offer more understanding of the issue considering the norms of Spain.
A discrepância que gera a instituição das instruções prévias é apreciada em distintos níveis -ético, jurídico social-, e alcança inclusive o âmbito terminológico, isto é, os termos empregados para se referir a esta instituição não são em absoluto pacíficos ou unívocos: desde testamentos vitais, vontades ou diretivas antecipadas, desejos expressados anteriormente, etc., o que leva a certa confusão sobre se se trata ou não da mesma figura e a certa insegurança jurídica, âmbito por certo sumamente prolixo neste sentido. Não obstante a abundante legislação e doutrina sobre o particular, existe pouca informação acerca da forma de registrar o documento, a possibilidade de consultá-lo ou os limites para seu cumprimento. Este artigo trata de oferecer maior luz a respeito, no seio da normativa espanhola.
Subject(s)
Humans , Informed Consent , Personal Autonomy , Living Wills/ethics , Living Wills/legislation & jurisprudenceABSTRACT
Background: Living wills have long been associated with end-of-life care. This study explored the promotion of living wills by general practitioners (GPs) and frail care nursing coordinators who were directly involved in the care of the elderly in Howick; KwaZulu-Natal. The study also explored their views regarding the pro forma living will disseminated by the Living Will Society.Subjects: Seven GPs and three frail care nursing coordinators; 10 in total.Design: The design was qualitative in-depth interviews and analysis; using the Framework method.Results: Both doctors and nursing staff understood the concept of living wills and acknowledged that they were beneficial to patients; their families and staff. They were concerned about the lack of legal status of the living will. They felt that the pro forma document from the Living Will Society was simple and clear. Despite identifying the low level of living will usage among patients; doctors and nursing staff felt that third-party organisations and individuals should promote living wills to patients; rather than promoting them to patients themselves.Conclusion: GPs and frail care nurse coordinators were knowledgeable about living wills in general; and the Living Will Society pro forma document in particular. They valued the contribution that living wills make to the care of the elderly; as they benefit patients; their families; healthcare workers and the health system. They also valued the pro forma living will document from the Living Will Society for its clarity and simplicity. However; the GPs and frail care nursing coordinators viewed the living will process as patient driven. They viewed their main role to be that of custodians; and not advocates; of the living wills