This paper reframes the futility debate, moving away from the question "Who decides when to end what is considered to be a medically inappropriate or futile treatment?" and toward the question "How can society make policy that will best account for the multitude of values and conflicts involved in such decision-making?" It offers a pragmatist moral epistemology that provides us with (1) a clear justification of why it is important to take best standards, norms, and physician judgment seriously and (2) a clear justification of why ample opportunity must be made for patients, families, and society to challenge those standards and norms.
Keywords: futility; medically inappropriate treatment; pragmatism.
© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press, on behalf of the Journal of Medicine and Philosophy Inc. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.