Is it ever right to prescribe placebos to patients in clinical practice? The General Medical Council is ambivalent about the issue; the American Medical Association asserts that placebos can be administered only if the patient is (somehow) ‘informed’. The potential problem with placebos is that they may involve deception: indeed, if this is the case, an ethical tension arises over the patient's autonomy and the physician's requirement to be open and honest, and the notion that medical care should be the primary concern. This paper examines the case of depression as an entry point for understanding the complexities of the prescription of placebos. Recent important meta-analyses of antidepressants claim that they are not significantly more effective in a clinical setting than placebos. Given that antidepressants have numerous adverse side effects and are hugely expensive, this provocative research has serious potential ethical and practical implications for patients and medical providers. Should placebos be prescribed in place of antidepressants? The case of depression highlights another important issue which medical ethical codes have hitherto overlooked: well-being is not synonymous with being realistic about oneself, one's circumstances and the future. While severely depressed individuals are unduly pessimistic about themselves and the world around them, treatment of depressed individuals can be deemed successful when patients have successfully attained those positive illusions that are indicative of psychological health. This is exactly what successful psychological treatments of depression seem to achieve. It is therefore possible that there may be a limited unavoidable role for deception in medicine.
- Codes of/position statements on professional ethics
- informed consent
- ethics committees/consultation
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Competing interests None.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- The duty to be Well-informed: The case of depression
- Talking more about talking cures: cognitive behavioural therapy and informed consent
- The moral case for the clinical placebo
- Neurofeedback as placebo: a case of unintentional deception?
- Considering the methodological limitations in the evidence base of antidepressants for depression: a reanalysis of a network meta-analysis
- Antidepressants for the treatment of depression in neurological disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
- Electroconvulsive therapy, the placebo effect and informed consent
- Comparative efficacy and acceptability of antidepressants in the long-term treatment of major depression: protocol for a systematic review and networkmeta-analysis
- Efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in treatment-resistant depression: the evidence thus far
- The concise argument