Epistemic burdens and the incentives of surrogate decision-makers
We aim to establish the following claim: other factors held constant, the relative weights of the epistemic burdens of competing treatment options serve to determine the options that patient surrogates pursue. Simply put, surrogates confront an incentive, ceteris paribus, to pursue treatment options with respect to which their knowledge is most adequate to the requirements of the case. Regardless of what the patient would choose, options that require more knowledge than the surrogate possesses (or is likely to learn) will either be neglected altogether or deeply discounted in the surrogate’s incentive structure. We establish this claim by arguing that the relation between epistemic burdens and incentives in decision-making is a general feature of surrogate decision-making. After establishing the claim, we draw out some of the implications for surrogate decision-making in medicine and offer philosophical and psychological explanations of the phenomenon.
KeywordsSurrogate decision-making Epistemology Ignorance
- Berger, J.T., E.G. DeRenzo, and J. Schwartz. 2008. Surrogate Decision Making: Reconciling Ethical Theory and Clinical Practice. Annals of Internal Medicine 149 (1): 48–53. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-149-1-200807010-00010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Buchanan, A.E., and D.W. Brock. 1989. Deciding for Others: The Ethics of Surrogate Decision Making., Studies in Philosophy and Health Policy Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Kibbe, B., and P.J. Ford. 2016. What’s Knowledge Got to Do with It? Ethics, Epistemology, and Intractable Conflicts in the Medical Setting. The Journal of clinical ethics 27 (4): 352–358.Google Scholar
- Scheall, S. forthcoming. Ignorance and the Incentive Structure confronting Policymakers. Cosmos + Taxis. Issue TBD Draft available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3240070.
- Suhl, J., P. Simons, T. Reedy, et al. 1994. Myth of Substituted Judgment. Archives of Internal Medicine 154 (1): 90–96. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.1994.00420010122014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar