Abstract:
The ethical complexities associated with substituting one’s personal perspective on end-of-life care for another’s are monumental. As a result, “[b]oth state legislatures and courts at every level, including the United States Supreme Court, have struggled with determining whether such decisions should be made and, if so, where the boundaries of such authority lie.” As remedy to this dilemma, Congress and state legislatures have enacted advance directives into law in an effort to offer guidance on avoiding this traumatic situation and allow patients to stipulate their desires.
However, advance directive law varies widely across the United States. This fragmentation has produced uncertainty surrounding advance planning, rendering these statutes essentially futile. This inconsistency began with the Supreme Court’s recognition of patient autonomy and has persisted in the evolution of state legislation, as demonstrated by three contiguous states: Mississippi, Texas, and Louisiana.
