Dr Tolga Guven and Dr Gurkan Sert argue the Turkish legal principles do not give clear guidance about the permissibility of medical paternalism. They then argue that the best interpretation of these principles requires respect for patients’ rights. I agree that medical paternalism is wrong, but the truth of this claim does not depend on legal interpretation or medical culture. Further, the antipaternalist thesis of Guven and Sert may command much more extensive reforms than they acknowledge.
- Care of the Dying Patient
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.
- Law, ethics and medicine
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Right to refuse treatment in Turkey: a diagnosis and a slightly less than modest proposal for reform
- Examining the ethico-legal aspects of the right to refuse treatment in Turkey
- Grasping the nettle—what to do when patients withdraw their consent for treatment: (a clinical perspective on the case of Ms B)
- Medical paternalism in House M.D.
- Three arguments against prescription requirements
- What do patients expect from their physicians? Qualitative research on the ethical aspects of patient statements
- Rethinking paternalism: an exploration of responses to the Israel Patient's Rights Act 1996
- The views of cancer patients on patient rights in the context of information and autonomy
- The development of “medical futility”: towards a procedural approach based on the role of the medical profession
- Consent for anaesthesia