Viki Kind has a provocative post today on HR 2705, which proposes to give a tax break to someone using a lawyer to complete their advance directive.
Kind writes "While at first glance, I love it that the government is considering ways to make sure people have advance directives but there is a hidden danger . . . doctors hate it when people have advance directives written by lawyers." Among other things, "the lawyer’s advance directive annoy and confuse the doctor." I absolutely agree. But we must remember, here, to distinguish between instructional and agent-appointing directives. Only the former are really subject to Kind's criticism.
Lawyers can certainly effectively help draft effective agent-appointing advance directives (aka DPAHCs). Such directive need not speak for themselves and guide medical treatment. They merely empower the agent to do that -- in real time. Moreover, I was just reminded yesterday, by a wonderful webinar by Charles Sabatino at the ABA, that lawyers can add some real value to such advance directives because of material gaps in many states' default healthcare agency rules.
2 comments:
I have met very few attorneys who know enough about state surrogacy & proxy statutes to be helpful to their clients on this issue. In most instances, you will probably receive better and more accurate advice from an experienced hospital social worker. Bonus: they don't charge you for it.
Thank you.
A local hospice nurse friend of mine (Shelia Grant) made this same point in a recent Washington Post commentary.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/10/AR2009081002420.html
Post a Comment