<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>living - Toronto Estate Law Blog</title>
<link>http://estatelaw.hullandhull.com/articles/topics/estate-trust/</link>
<description></description>
<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2008</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 May 2008 04:00:00 -0500</lastBuildDate>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 10:42:54 -0500</pubDate>
<generator>http://www.movabletype.org/?v=3.34</generator>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 

<item>
<title>When Living Wills Attack</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Who can forget the sad case of Terry Schiavo, the poor lady&nbsp;who&nbsp;suffered catastrophic brain damage in 1990 and was kept alive&nbsp;in a vegetative state on a feeding tube for 15 years?&nbsp; Readers will remember the anguish involved&nbsp;when her husband was forced to litigate&nbsp;against her parents in order to&nbsp;get the tube removed so Terry could die in peace.&nbsp; This became a powerful argument in favour&nbsp;of a &quot;Living Will&quot;, which is&nbsp;basically a document&nbsp;in which individuals outline their&nbsp;&quot;personal choices&quot; regarding&nbsp;end-of-life treatments.&nbsp; Living Wills became a feel-good legal product, a perceived solution to&nbsp;the heart-rending situations like Terry's.</p><p>Too bad the research shows that Living Wills may not live up to the hype.&nbsp; According to a <a href="http://today.uci.edu/news/release_detail.asp?key=701today.uci.edu/news/release_detail.asp?key=701today.uci.edu/news/release_detail.asp?key=701">recent study </a>by two University of California Irvine&nbsp;researchers, Professors Peter Ditto and Elizabeth Loftus, Living Wills&nbsp;appear to have serious defects.&nbsp; One problem is that&nbsp;patient preferences change over time.&nbsp; For instance, one tends to be more inclined against end-of-life treatments immediately after a&nbsp;hospital stay,&nbsp;but this&nbsp;changes with time.&nbsp; Also, positive&nbsp;treatment&nbsp;results of family members make&nbsp;a patient&nbsp;more inclined to end-of-life treatment.&nbsp; Many people who make Living Wills&nbsp;change their preferences but forget about their Living Will, or <a href="http://www.newuniversity.org/main/article?slug=study_challenges_validity_of152">misidentify those preferences</a>&nbsp;in the Living Will.&nbsp; </p><p>Perhaps the most glaring weakness is that Living Wills&nbsp;do not&nbsp;appear to provide guidance &nbsp;to surrogates who have read them.&nbsp;&nbsp;According to the study, the accuracy of a surrogate who has read a Living Will in prediciting a loved one's treatment preferences is no higher than that of a surrogate who has not read the Living Will.&nbsp; So a Living Will can&nbsp;be totally inconsistent with the patient's most recent intentions.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p>Having a Living Will apparently&nbsp;makes both the patients and the surrogates feel better, so it's not all bad news.&nbsp; </p><p>Have a safe day,</p><p>Chris Graham</p><p>&nbsp;</p>]]></description>
<link>http://estatelaw.hullandhull.com/2008/05/articles/topics/estate-trust/when-living-wills-attack/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://estatelaw.hullandhull.com/2008/05/articles/topics/estate-trust/when-living-wills-attack/</guid>
<category>Elder Law</category><category>Estate &amp; Trust</category><category>Ethical Issues</category><category>Guardian of Person</category><category>Wills</category><category>attorney for personal care</category><category>end-of-life treatments</category><category>living</category><category>will</category>
<pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2008 04:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
<author>nonley@hullandhull.com (Hull &amp; Hull LLP)</author>

</item>


</channel>
</rss>