Literature DB >> 32354791

Value of choice.

Tom Walker1.   

Abstract

Accounts of the value of patient choice in contemporary medical ethics typically focus on the act of choosing. Being the one to choose, it is argued, can be valuable either because it enables one to bring about desired outcomes, or because it is a way of enacting one's autonomy. This paper argues that all such accounts miss something important. In some circumstances, it is having the opportunity to choose, not the act of choosing, that is valuable. That is because in many situations whether one has, or is denied, that opportunity conveys how one is seen. In particular, it conveys whether or not one is seen as an equal and competent member of society. Adequately recognising this fact has implications for what healthcare professionals should do, ones that require a move away from the current focus on autonomy. The paper draws out these implications by focusing on patients who may struggle to be recognised as competent and equal members of society, and whose autonomy may thus itself sometimes be in question. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Entities:  

Keywords:  competence/incompetence; ethics

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32354791     DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106067

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Ethics        ISSN: 0306-6800            Impact factor:   2.903


  2 in total

1.  AI, big data, and the future of consent.

Authors:  Adam J Andreotta; Nin Kirkham; Marco Rizzi
Journal:  AI Soc       Date:  2021-08-30

2.  Equipoise, standard of care and consent: responding to the authorisation of new COVID-19 treatments in randomised controlled trials.

Authors:  Soren Holm; Jonathan Lewis; Rafael Dal-Ré
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2022-05-23       Impact factor: 5.926

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.