Illinois Compiled Statutes

755 ILCS 40/25 (2026)

Surrogate decision making

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(755 ILCS 40/25) (from Ch. 110 1/2, par. 851-25)
    Sec. 25. Surrogate decision making.
    (a) When a patient lacks decisional capacity, the health care provider must make a reasonable inquiry as to the availability and authority of a health care agent under the Powers of Attorney for Health Care Law. When no health care agent is authorized and available, the health care provider must make a reasonable inquiry as to the availability of possible surrogates listed in items (1) through (4) of this subsection. For purposes of this Section, a reasonable inquiry includes, but is not limited to, identifying a member of the patient's family or other health care agent by examining the patient's personal effects or medical records. If a family member or other health care agent is identified, an attempt to contact that person by telephone must be made within 24 hours after a determination by the provider that the patient lacks decisional capacity. No person shall be liable for civil damages or subject to professional discipline based on a claim of violating a patient's right to confidentiality as a result of making a reasonable inquiry as to the availability of a patient's family member or health care agent, except for willful or wanton misconduct.
    The surrogate decision makers, as identified by the attending physician, are then authorized to make decisions as follows: (i) for patients who lack decisional capacity and do not have a qualifying condition, medical treatment decisions may be made in accordance with subsection (b-5) of Section 20; and (ii) for patients who lack decisional capacity and have a qualifying condition, medical treatment decisions including whether to forgo life-sustaining treatment on behalf of the patient may be made without court order or judicial involvement in the following order of priority:
        (1) the patient's guardian of the person;
        (2) the patient's spouse;
        (3) any adult son or daughter of the patient;
        (4) either parent of the patient;
        (5) any adult brother or sister of the patient;
        (6) any adult grandchild of the patient;
        (7) a close friend of the patient;
        (8) the patient's guardian of the estate;
        (9) the patient's temporary custodian appointed under
    
subsection (2) of Section 2-10 of the Juvenile Court Act of 1987 if the court has entered an order granting such authority pursuant to subsection (12) of Section 2-10 of the Juvenile Court Act of 1987.
    The health care provider shall have the right to rely on any of the above surrogates if the provider believes after reasonable inquiry that neither a health care agent under the Powers of Attorney for Health Care Law nor a surrogate of higher priority is available.
    Where there are multiple surrogate decision makers at the same priority level in the hierarchy, it shall be the responsibility of those surrogates to make reasonable efforts to reach a consensus as to their decision on behalf of the patient regarding the forgoing of life-sustaining treatment. If 2 or more surrogates who are in the same category and have equal priority indicate to the attending physician that they disagree about the health care matter at issue, a majority of the available persons in that category (or the parent with custodial rights) shall control, unless the minority (or the parent without custodial rights) initiates guardianship proceedings in accordance with the Probate Act of 1975. No health care provider or other person is required to seek appointment of a guardian.
    (b) After a surrogate has been identified, the name, address, telephone number, and relationship of that person to the patient shall be recorded in the patient's medical record.
    (c) Any surrogate who becomes unavailable for any reason may be replaced by applying the provisions of Section 25 in the same manner as for the initial choice of surrogate.
    (d) In the event an individual of a higher priority to an identified surrogate becomes available and willing to be the surrogate, the individual with higher priority may be identified as the surrogate. In the event an individual in a higher, a lower, or the same priority level or a health care provider seeks to challenge the priority of or the life-sustaining treatment decision of the recognized surrogate decision maker, the challenging party may initiate guardianship proceedings in accordance with the Probate Act of 1975.
    (e) The surrogate decision maker shall have the same right as the patient to receive medical information and medical records and to consent to disclosure.
    (f) Any surrogate shall have the authority to make decisions for the patient until removed by the patient who no longer lacks decisional capacity, appointment of a guardian of the person, or the patient's death.
(Source: P.A. 100-959, eff. 1-1-19.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1996–2008 · leading case: Moriarity v. Rockford Health Sys., Inc., 848 N.E.2d 202 (Ill. App. Ct. 2006).
Moriarity v. Rockford Health Sys., Inc., 848 N.E.2d 202 (Ill. App. Ct. 2006). · cites it 10× “755 ILCS 40/25(a) (West 1998). If no health care agent is authorized and available, the health care provider must make a reasonable inquiry as to the availability of possible surrogates in the following priority: the patient's guardian of the person, the patient's spouse, any…”
Collins v. Lake Forest Hosp., 821 N.E.2d 316 (Ill. 2004). · cites it 7× “” 755 ILCS 40/25(a) (West 2000). The hospital contends that even this limited duty did not arise here because the duty exists only after the attending physician has made the determination that the patient lacks decisional capacity.”
Ficke v. Evangelical Health Sys., 674 N.E.2d 888 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996). · cites it 4× “" 755 ILCS 40/25(a) (West 1992). The Act provides that the "determination that an adult patient lacks decisional capacity shall be made by the attending physician to a reasonable degree of medical certainty.”
Pilarski v. Schmidt, 699 N.E.2d 1123 (Ill. App. Ct. 1998). · cites it 4× “) (the attending physician and at least one other qualified physician must determine that the patient lacks decisional capacity and has a “qualifying condition” defined as a “terminal condition,” “permanent unconsciousness” or an “incurable or irreversible condition,” before the…”
Bergland v. Dep't of Pub. Health, 892 N.E.2d 1076 (Ill. App. Ct. 2008). · cites it 6× “755 ILCS 40/25 (West 2006). It also requires the facility to maintain any advance directives proffered by the patient or another authorized person, such as do not resuscitate orders, living wills, or a power of attorney for health care in the patient's medical records for the…”
Collins v. Lake Forest Hosp., 798 N.E.2d 143 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). · cites it 3× “” 755 ILCS 40/25 (West 2000). The Act defines “decisional capacity” as “the ability to understand and appreciate the nature and consequences of a decision regarding medical treatment or forgoing life-sustaining treatment and the ability to reach and communicate an informed…”
Collins v. Lake Forest Hosp. (Ill. 2004). · cites it 7× “” 755 ILCS 40/25(a) (West 2000). The hospital contends that even this limited duty did not arise here because the duty exists only after the attending physician has made the determination that the patient lacks decisional capacity.”
Collins v. Lake Forest Hosp. (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). · cites it 3× “" 755 ILCS 40/25 (West 2000). The Act defines "decisional capacity" as "the ability to understand and appreciate the nature and consequences of a decision regarding medical treatment or forgoing life-sustaining treatment and the ability to reach and communicate an informed…”
In re Est. of Darlene Allen (Ill. App. Ct. 2006). · cites it 3× “755 ILCS 40/25(a) (West 1998). If no health care agent is authorized and available, the health care provider must make a reasonable inquiry as to the availability of possible surrogates in the following priority: the patient's guardian of the person, the patient's spouse, any…”
In re Schmidt (Ill. App. Ct. 1998). · cites it 4× “) (the attending physician and at least one other qualified physician must determine that the patient lacks decisional capacity and has a "qualifying condition" defined as a "terminal condition," "permanent unconsciousness" or an "incurable or irreversible condition," before the…”
Ficke v. Evangelical Health Sys. (Ill. App. Ct. 1996). · cites it 2× “" 755 ILCS 40/25(a) (West 1992). The Act provides that the "determination that an adult patient lacks decisional capacity shall be made by the attending physician to a reasonable degree of medical certainty.”
Bergland v. The Dep't of Pub. Health (Ill. App. Ct. 2008). “” 755 ILCS 40/25(e) (West 2004). A health care provider may rely on the authority of the surrogate decision maker as though the decision had been made by a patient with decisional capacity.”
— 755 ILCS 40/25(a) — 10 cases
Moriarity v. Rockford Health Sys., Inc., 848 N.E.2d 202 (Ill. App. Ct. 2006). “755 ILCS 40/25(a) (West 1998). If no health care agent is authorized and available, the health care provider must make a reasonable inquiry as to the availability of possible surrogates in the following priority: the patient's guardian of the person, the patient's spouse, any…”
Collins v. Lake Forest Hosp., 821 N.E.2d 316 (Ill. 2004). “” 755 ILCS 40/25(a) (West 2000). The hospital contends that even this limited duty did not arise here because the duty exists only after the attending physician has made the determination that the patient lacks decisional capacity.”
Ficke v. Evangelical Health Sys., 674 N.E.2d 888 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996). “" 755 ILCS 40/25(a) (West 1992). The Act provides that the "determination that an adult patient lacks decisional capacity shall be made by the attending physician to a reasonable degree of medical certainty.”
Pilarski v. Schmidt, 699 N.E.2d 1123 (Ill. App. Ct. 1998). “) (the attending physician and at least one other qualified physician must determine that the patient lacks decisional capacity and has a “qualifying condition” defined as a “terminal condition,” “permanent unconsciousness” or an “incurable or irreversible condition,” before the…”
Collins v. Lake Forest Hosp., 798 N.E.2d 143 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). “” 755 ILCS 40/25 (West 2000). The Act defines “decisional capacity” as “the ability to understand and appreciate the nature and consequences of a decision regarding medical treatment or forgoing life-sustaining treatment and the ability to reach and communicate an informed…”
— 755 ILCS 40/25(a)(i) — 1 case
Moriarity v. Rockford Health Sys., Inc., 848 N.E.2d 202 (Ill. App. Ct. 2006). “755 ILCS 40/25(a) (West 1998). If no health care agent is authorized and available, the health care provider must make a reasonable inquiry as to the availability of possible surrogates in the following priority: the patient's guardian of the person, the patient's spouse, any…”
— 755 ILCS 40/25(a)(ii) — 1 case
Moriarity v. Rockford Health Sys., Inc., 848 N.E.2d 202 (Ill. App. Ct. 2006). “755 ILCS 40/25(a) (West 1998). If no health care agent is authorized and available, the health care provider must make a reasonable inquiry as to the availability of possible surrogates in the following priority: the patient's guardian of the person, the patient's spouse, any…”
— 755 ILCS 40/25(b) — 2 cases
Collins v. Lake Forest Hosp., 821 N.E.2d 316 (Ill. 2004). “” 755 ILCS 40/25(a) (West 2000). The hospital contends that even this limited duty did not arise here because the duty exists only after the attending physician has made the determination that the patient lacks decisional capacity.”
Collins v. Lake Forest Hosp. (Ill. 2004). “” 755 ILCS 40/25(a) (West 2000). The hospital contends that even this limited duty did not arise here because the duty exists only after the attending physician has made the determination that the patient lacks decisional capacity.”
— 755 ILCS 40/25(d) — 1 case
Bergland v. Dep't of Pub. Health, 892 N.E.2d 1076 (Ill. App. Ct. 2008). “755 ILCS 40/25 (West 2006). It also requires the facility to maintain any advance directives proffered by the patient or another authorized person, such as do not resuscitate orders, living wills, or a power of attorney for health care in the patient's medical records for the…”
— 755 ILCS 40/25(e) — 2 cases
Bergland v. Dep't of Pub. Health, 892 N.E.2d 1076 (Ill. App. Ct. 2008). “755 ILCS 40/25 (West 2006). It also requires the facility to maintain any advance directives proffered by the patient or another authorized person, such as do not resuscitate orders, living wills, or a power of attorney for health care in the patient's medical records for the…”
Bergland v. The Dep't of Pub. Health (Ill. App. Ct. 2008). “” 755 ILCS 40/25(e) (West 2004). A health care provider may rely on the authority of the surrogate decision maker as though the decision had been made by a patient with decisional capacity.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.