Robert Veatch

Georgetown University, Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Faculty Member +1Georgetown University, Philosophy, Faculty MemberGeorgetown University, Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Faculty Member

Philosophy

232 Followers 10 Following 5 Co-authorsTotal Views

Papers

Justice and the Right to Health Care: An Egalitarian Account

Philosophy and Medicine, 2000

This essay is meant to be an account of an egalitarian theory of justice applied to health care. ... more This essay is meant to be an account of an egalitarian theory of justice applied to health care. It will in part be a descriptive account of how those who favor some version of a qualified “right to equal health” or a principle of distribution of health care based primarily on need have supported their views. In addition, it will in part be a normative account of the kinds of arguments and assumptions that might best support the egalitarian position and what qualifications might be necessary.

Ethics and the Care of the Child with Terminal Illness

Coping with Crisis and Handicap, 1981

Against Virtue: A Deontological Critique of Virtue Theory in Medical Ethics

Philosophy and Medicine, 1985

Download

The Case for Contract in Medical Ethics

Philosophy and Medicine, 1983

Principles of organ and tissue allocation and donation by living donors

Transplantation Proceedings, Nov 1, 1992

Download

Brain death. II. A status report of legal considerations

Jama the Journal of the American Medical Association, Oct 17, 1977

JAMA, the Journal of the American Medical Association, is a highly cited weekly medical journal t... more

Case Studies in Biomedical Ethics

Assessing Pellegrino's Reconstruction of Medical Morality

Http Dx Doi Org 10 1080 15265160500507082, Mar 1, 2006

Download

The Development of Bioethics: Bringing Physician Ethics into the Moral Consensus

Case studies in biomedical ethics : decision-making, principles, and cases

Equity in liver allocation

Medical Ethics, Feb 1, 2001

Ethics Consultation: Permission from Patients and Other Problems of Method

American Journal of Bioethics, Dec 7, 2010

ABSTRACT

Inactivating a Total Artificial Heart: Special Moral Problems

Http Dx Doi Org 10 1080 07481180302902, Oct 29, 2010

It seems generally correct that patients (or their valid surrogates) should be able to withdraw c... more It seems generally correct that patients (or their valid surrogates) should be able to withdraw consent for the use of the total artificial heart (TAH) just as they presently may withdraw consent for other life-prolonging technologies such as the ventilator, but lingering moral problems remain with such decisions. First, should patients be permitted to demand actual removal of the TAH rather than mere deactivation? Second, foregoing other life-prolonging technologies is normally considered &quot;indirect&quot; killing and is therefore judged legal (as well as moral to those who accept only indirect killing). As long as the society includes irreversible stoppage of the heart as one of the criteria for death, however, stopping a TAH will be considered direct killing, i.e., murder. To circumvent this inconsistency, society must change its conclusion that stopping other life-prolonging technologies is merely indirect killing, explicitly legalize direct killing by means of stopping a TAH, or revisit the definition of death to eliminate the cardiac standard for death from the definition of death. Assuming that the stopping of the TAH with patient or surrogate consent is acceptable, we must then face the question of whether physicians who believe the TAH is serving no purpose can unilaterally stop the device against the wishes of a patient or surrogate who believes it is still serving a worthwhile purpose. Clinicians should be presumed authoritative in determining the predicted effect of the TAH, but, if the TAH can temporarily prolong life for a patient in a way that is desired by the patient or surrogate, case law, professional society recommendation, and moral analysis all support the conclusion that the TAH must be continued even against the conscientious objection of the physician