Article Text
Abstract
Three main claims are made in this paper. First, it is argued that Onora O’Neill has uncovered a serious problem in the way medical ethicists have thought about both respect for autonomy and informed consent. Medical ethicists have tended to think that autonomous choices are intrinsically worthy of respect, and that informed consent procedures are the best way to respect the autonomous choices of individuals. However, O’Neill convincingly argues that we should abandon both these thoughts. Second, it is argued that O’Neill’s proposed solution to this problem is inadequate. O’Neill’s approach requires that a more modest view of the purpose of informed consent procedures be adopted. In her view, the purpose of informed consent procedures is simply to avoid deception and coercion, and the ethical justification for informed consent derives from a different ethical principle, which she calls principled autonomy. It is argued that contrary to what O’Neill claims, the wrongness of coercion cannot be derived from principled autonomy, and so its credentials as a justification for informed consent procedures is weak. Third, it is argued that we do better to rethink autonomy and informed consent in terms of respecting persons as ends in themselves, and a characteristically liberal commitment to allowing individuals to make certain categories of decisions for themselves.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Should healthcare professionals respect autonomy just because it promotes welfare?
- Capturing and promoting the autonomy of capacitous vulnerable adults
- What do patients value in their hospital care? An empirical perspective on autonomy centred bioethics
- Autonomy and negatively informed consent
- Authenticity and autonomy in deep-brain stimulation
- Developing an ethics framework for living donor transplantation
- Some limits of informed consent
- Moral principles and medical practice: the role of patient autonomy in the extensive use of radiological services
- In defence of personal autonomy
- Consent and end of life decisions