Adults Without Advocates and the Unrepresented: A Narrative Review of Terminology and Settings

Socially isolated adults, including those with and without the ability to make medical decisions, are encountered in clinical practice and are at risk for adverse health outcomes. Consensus is lacking on appropriate terminology to describe subpopulations of these patients. In addition, little is known about the settings in which they present. These gaps prevent clinicians and policymakers from identifying and understanding these populations and deploying appropriate resources to meet their complex needs. We conducted a narrative review of literature on socially isolated adults aged 50 and older to assess and integrate the available evidence regarding the terminology used to describe unrepresented patients and adults without advocates to inform consensus on terminology. We also identified the settings in which unrepresented patients and adults without advocates are described in the literature, including both within and outside health care settings. Our results indicate that there is heterogeneity and inconsistency in the terminology used to describe socially isolated adults, as well as heterogeneity in the settings in which they are identified in the literature. Our findings suggest that future work should include achieving consensus on terminology and integrating proactive interdisciplinary interventions across health systems and communities to prevent adults without advocates from becoming unrepresented.

An Official American Thoracic Society/American Geriatrics Society Policy Statement

Background and Rationale: ICU clinicians regularly care for patients who lack capacity, an applicable advance directive, and an available surrogate decision-maker. Although there is no consensus on terminology, we refer to these patients as “unrepresented.” There is considerable controversy about how to make treatment decisions for these patients, and there is significant variability in both law and clinical practice.

Purpose and Objectives: This multisociety statement provides clinicians and hospital administrators with recommendations for decision-making on behalf of unrepresented patients in the critical care setting.

Methods: An interprofessional, multidisciplinary expert committee developed this policy statement by using an iterative consensus process with a diverse working group representing critical care medicine, palliative care, pediatric medicine, nursing, social work, gerontology, geriatrics, patient advocacy, bioethics, philosophy, elder law, and health law.

Main Results: The committee designed its policy recommendations to promote five ethical goals: 1) to protect highly vulnerable patients, 2) to demonstrate respect for persons, 3) to provide appropriate medical care, 4) to safeguard against unacceptable discrimination, and 5) to avoid undue influence of competing obligations and conflicting interests. These recommendations also are intended to strike an appropriate balance between excessive and insufficient procedural safeguards. The committee makes the following recommendations: 1) institutions should offer advance care planning to prevent patients at high risk for becoming unrepresented from meeting this definition; 2) institutions should implement strategies to determine whether seemingly unrepresented patients are actually unrepresented, including careful capacity assessments and diligent searches for potential surrogates; 3) institutions should manage decision-making for unrepresented patients using input from a diverse interprofessional, multidisciplinary committee rather than ad hoc by treating clinicians; 4) institutions should use all available information on the patient’s preferences and values to guide treatment decisions; 5) institutions should manage decision-making for unrepresented patients using a fair process that comports with procedural due process; 6) institutions should employ this fair process even when state law authorizes procedures with less oversight.

Conclusions: This multisociety statement provides guidance for clinicians and hospital administrators on medical decision-making for unrepresented patients in the critical care setting.

Marginally Represented Patients and the Moral Authority of Surrogates

Incapacitated adult patients are commonly divided into two groups for purposes of decision making; those with a surrogate and those without. Respectively, these groups are often referred to as represented and unrepresented, and the relative ethics of decision making between them raises two particular issues. The first issue involves the differential application of the best interests standard between groups. Second is the prevailing notion that representedness and unrepresentedness are categorical phenomena, though it is more aptly understood as a multidimensional and continuous variable based on relational moral authority. This paper examines the nature of representedness as it relates to ethical norms of surrogate decision making.

Ethical Challenges in Caring for Unrepresented Adults: A Qualitative Study of Key Stakeholders

The decision-making process on behalf of unrepresented adults (ie, those who lack capacity to make medical decisions and have no identifiable surrogate) is at risk for not incorporating their interests, raising ethical concerns. We performed semistructured interviews with key stakeholders across multiple sectors in an urban county who participate in the care of or decision-making process for unrepresented adults. This included a safety net healthcare system, social services, and legal services. Participants were healthcare, social service, and legal professionals who worked with unrepresented adults (n = 25). Our interview questions explored the current process for proxy decision making in cases of unrepresented adults and potential alternatives. We recorded, transcribed, and analyzed interviews using the constant comparative method to identify major themes related to ethical challenges if they were raised. Participants grappled with multiple ethical challenges around the care of unrepresented adults. Themes described by participants were: (1) prioritizing autonomy; (2) varying safety thresholds; (3) distributing resources fairly; and (4) taking a moral toll on stakeholders. In conclusion, all stakeholders identified ethical challenges in caring for unrepresented adults. An applied ethical framework that takes these dilemmas into account could improve ethical practice for unrepresented adults and lessen the emotional toll on stakeholders. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:1724-1729, 2019.