Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

We examine the ethical principles underpinning advance directives (ADs) and the legal duties of doctors in determining their validity. A physician attending an incompetent patient with an acute life-threatening illness, and an AD refusing treatment, should ensure that the AD is legally valid before making the treatment decision. Treatment against a patient's wishes, as expressed in a valid AD, compromises patient autonomy and may constitute battery. Conversely, withholding treatment in accordance with an AD that is not legally valid risks substantial harm to the patient and may constitute breach of the duty of care and negligence. Legally valid directives should be respected. If an AD is not legally valid, the patient should be treated in his or her best interests. If uncertain, the physician should treat according to the patient's best interests while seeking legal advice.


Journal article


Med J Aust

Publication Date





545 - 548


Death and Euthanasia, Legal Approach, Acute Disease, Advance Directives, Australia, Decision Making, Ethics, Medical, Freedom, Humans, Malpractice, Mental Competency, Physicians, Treatment Refusal