Health Care Analysis

, Volume 13, Issue 2, pp 119–128 | Cite as

Should Age be a Deciding Factor in Ethical Decision-Making?

  • Robert K. PretzlaffEmail author


The question of age as a factor in ethical decision-making takes two forms. The first form considers age as a factor at the societal, or policy, level, and the second as a factor in determining the capacity of the individual patient to make decisions regarding their own care. This article satisfies itself with a consideration of only the latter question. The issue of whether age is contributing factor in medical decision-making is frequently posited when one considers ethically charged instances of medical decision making at the end of life. Few would argue that the person who has the capacity for decision-making should be denied the ability to exercise that facility and so, it is when a person has lost their ability for making those choices that the question of age as a contributing factor in ethical decision making is raised. The question therefore becomes one of capacity more then age, with age as a useful, but inexact, gauge of that capacity. The inexactitude of age as a surrogate of capacity is a contributing factor to the problem posed in this series of articles. Therefore, to define the relative contribution of age to the capacity for ethical decision-making this article will focus not on the loss of that ability, but rather on the factors that define the realization of that faculty. To do this it will be necessary to define how that faculty is to be to be measured and what are the characteristics of an ethical decision that define it apart from other decisions. Since at the beginning of life, if age is the only variable (adjusting for other co-morbid states) then the issue of surrogacy is a temporary one and is unlike the adult where the presumption is that the person is unlikely to regain decision-making capacity as they slip further into their morbid state.


moral development surrogate decision-making medical decision-making child 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Department of Health and Human Services. (2001) Title 45, Part 46 Protection of Human Subjects. National Institutes of Health, Office for Protection from Research Risks.Google Scholar
  2. Schonfeld, D. (2003) Participation and Protection of Children in Clinical Research. in IOM: Committee Clinical Research Involving Children. Washington, DC: American Academy of Pediatrics.Google Scholar
  3. Ondrusek, N., et al. (1998) Empirical examination of the ability of children to consent to clinical research J.Med Ethics. Journal of Medicine and Ethics 24, 158–165.Google Scholar
  4. Schaeffer, M.H., et al. (1996) The impact of disease severity on the informed consent process in clinical research. American Journal of Medicine 100(3), 261–268.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Fogas, B.S., Oesterheld, J.R. and Shader, R.I. (2001) A retrospective study of children’s perceptions of participation as clinical research subjects in a minimal risk study. Journal of Devlopment and Behavioral Pediatrics, 22(4), 211–216.Google Scholar
  6. Kant, E. (1997) In L. Beck (Ed.), Foundation of the Metaphysics of Morals, 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice–Hall.Google Scholar
  7. Kohlberg, L. (1963) The development of children’s orientations toward a moral order. I. Sequence in the development of moral thought. Vita Humans International Zeitschrift fur Lebensalterforschung, 6, 11–33.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PediatricsChief, Critical Care MedicineSacramento
  2. 2.Department of PediatricsChief, Critical Care Medicine, UC Davis School of MedicineSacramento

Personalised recommendations