Literature DB >> 17975729

Advocating mandatory patient 'autonomy' in healthcare: adverse reactions and side effects.

Myfanwy Davies1, Glyn Elwyn.   

Abstract

Promoting patient autonomy has become a key imperative in health service encounters. We will examine the potential negative effects of over-promoting patient autonomy and consider the impact on patient access, their experience and the provision of equitable services by focusing on an extreme manifestation of this trend, i.e. calls for patient involvement in health care decision making to be mandatory. Advocates of mandatory autonomy hold that patients have a duty to themselves, to society and to the medical system to make decisions on their health care independently. Models of mandatory autonomy may be contrasted to those of optional autonomy that seek to ascertain patients' decisional preferences and to understand wider limitations on their freedom to choose. Where choice as decisional responsibility becomes mandatory it ceases to promote agency and where autonomous choice is understood as an individualistic practice it will contribute to the cultural dominance of Western values. Moreover, taking a view that principlist ethics needs to take account of the social and cultural contexts of individual lives, we argue that if mandatory autonomy were to be over-emphasised as part of an ongoing move towards patient choice in UK National Health Service (NHS), educated and affluent people would be more able to exercise choices at the expense of people who are experienced in asserting preferences and who have the resources to make use of choices. We will argue that the promotion of autonomy needs to be tempered by steps to enable less powerful social, cultural and economic groups to contribute to decision making and to support individuals who may feel abandoned by having decisional responsibility transferred to them. Until constraints on individual choice can be understood and addressed, we advocate the model of optional autonomy used in shared decision making and make recommendations for practice, policy, education and research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17975729     DOI: 10.1007/s10728-007-0075-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Care Anal        ISSN: 1065-3058


  18 in total

1.  Paternalism or partnership? Patients have grown up-and there's no going back.

Authors:  A Coulter
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-09-18

2.  Decision-making in the physician-patient encounter: revisiting the shared treatment decision-making model.

Authors:  C Charles; A Gafni; T Whelan
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 4.634

3.  After Bristol: putting patients at the centre.

Authors:  Angela Coulter
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-03-16

4.  Health-related quality of life in patient decision making.

Authors:  Robert M Kaplan
Journal:  J Soc Issues       Date:  1991

5.  Preferences for autonomy when patients are physicians.

Authors:  J Ende; L Kazis; M A Moskowitz
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1990 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 5.128

6.  Clinical decision making: from theory to practice. Connecting value and costs. Whom do we ask, and what do we ask them?

Authors:  D M Eddy
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1990-10-03       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  General practitioners' perceptions of Asian and non-Asian patients.

Authors:  W I Ahmad; M R Baker; E E Kernohan
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  1991-03       Impact factor: 2.267

8.  Developing a quality criteria framework for patient decision aids: online international Delphi consensus process.

Authors:  Glyn Elwyn; Annette O'Connor; Dawn Stacey; Robert Volk; Adrian Edwards; Angela Coulter; Richard Thomson; Alexandra Barratt; Michael Barry; Steven Bernstein; Phyllis Butow; Aileen Clarke; Vikki Entwistle; Deb Feldman-Stewart; Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Hilary Llewellyn-Thomas; Nora Moumjid; Al Mulley; Cornelia Ruland; Karen Sepucha; Alan Sykes; Tim Whelan
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2006-08-14

9.  Menopause as a long-term risk to health: implications of general practitioner accounts of prevention for women's choice and decision-making.

Authors:  Madeleine J Murtagh; Julie Hepworth
Journal:  Sociol Health Illn       Date:  2003-03

10.  Nonabandonment: a central obligation for physicians.

Authors:  T E Quill; C K Cassel
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1995-03-01       Impact factor: 25.391

View more
  13 in total

1.  Is Shared Decision Making a Utopian Dream or an Achievable Goal?

Authors:  Louisa Blair; France Légaré
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 3.883

2.  Power and powerlessness: GPs' narratives about lifestyle counselling.

Authors:  Eirik Abildsnes; Liv Tveit Walseth; Signe A Flottorp; Per S Stensland
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 3.  Governance mechanisms in the physician-patient relationship: a literature review and conceptual framework.

Authors:  Gabriela Tofan; Virginia Bodolica; Martin Spraggon
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2012-08-10       Impact factor: 3.377

4.  How can we best respect patient autonomy in breast cancer treatment decisions?

Authors:  Sarah T Hawley; Reshma Jagsi; Kathryn A Martinez; Allison W Kurian
Journal:  Breast Cancer Manag       Date:  2015

Review 5.  Supporting patient autonomy: the importance of clinician-patient relationships.

Authors:  Vikki A Entwistle; Stacy M Carter; Alan Cribb; Kirsten McCaffery
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2010-03-06       Impact factor: 5.128

6.  Withdrawal rates as a consequence of disclosure of risk associated with manipulation of the cervical spine.

Authors:  Jennifer M Langworthy; Lianne Forrest
Journal:  Chiropr Osteopat       Date:  2010-10-26

7.  Situationally-sensitive knowledge translation and relational decision making in hyperacute stroke: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Madeleine J Murtagh; Duika L Burges Watson; K Neil Jenkings; Mabel L S Lie; Joan E Mackintosh; Gary A Ford; Richard G Thomson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-06-01       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Shared decision making: relevant concepts and facilitating strategies.

Authors:  Jong-Myon Bae
Journal:  Epidemiol Health       Date:  2017-10-30

9.  Arduous implementation: does the Normalisation Process Model explain why it's so difficult to embed decision support technologies for patients in routine clinical practice.

Authors:  Glyn Elwyn; France Légaré; Trudy van der Weijden; Adrian Edwards; Carl May
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2008-12-31       Impact factor: 7.327

10.  Treating patients as persons: a capabilities approach to support delivery of person-centered care.

Authors:  Vikki A Entwistle; Ian S Watt
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 11.229

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.