Abstract
In this talk, I will claim that conflicting value systems between healthcare providers (HCPs) and surrogate decision-makers (SDMs) lie at the root of many intractable end-of-life treatment disputes. I categorize these disparate value systems as Weberian “Ideal Types” to provide a framework for navigating this species of conflict. I argue that the most prevalent value system of HCPs might be understood as a “Best Interest Values” (BIV) hierarchy and that this value system is irreconcilable with the set of “Life-Continuation Values” (LCV) held by a sizable number of families who comprise a “normative minority.” I believe that HCPs facing seemingly intractable conflict with SDMs would be aided by understanding their BIV values framework as just one of other cogent values systems in the context of ethical pluralism. I worry that there is a pervasive hegemony by the dominant BIV values system against the normative minorities who hold an LCV worldview, and I argue that this hegemony is neither fair nor constructive. While my analysis is focused on American society, I am eager to engage with the audience about this framework’s applicability in the UK context.
