PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 14593218

Sick autonomy.

Abstract

Complex social and economic forces have placed patient autonomy at the center of medical ethics, and thereby displaced an older ethic of physician beneficence. This development arose, and is sustained, by waning trust in the traditional doctor-patient relationship. As patients have increasingly become clients and consumers, a contract basis for medical care has put the ancient covenant of care in jeopardy. Here, a philosophical approach to harmonize the apparent conflicting claims of patient autonomy and physician beneficence is offered by demonstrating that autonomy need not be understood as protecting a threatened identity. If persons are regarded as atomistic, certain defensive notions of individualistic rights-based autonomy prevail; if a relational construction of personal identity is employed instead, then respect for autonomy becomes part of a wider morality of relationship and care. By reconfiguring trust within this latter understanding of personhood, bioethics better balances its concerns over choices and actions with those of relationship and responsibility. Neither atomistic autonomy nor the ethics of responsibility can claim hegemony, for they are mutually interdependent, and a complete account of medicine's moral axis requires that they be integrated. This reorientation is crucial for reasserting the ethos of clinical medicine, whose fundamental mandate remains the care of others.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Alfred I Tauber. 2003. Sick autonomy.. https://doi.org/10.1353/pbm.2003.0093

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

[Neuroethics--a future discipline?].

Progress in neuroscience leads not only to novel therapeutic opportunities but also raises several ethical problems. These problems are often subsumed under the term "neuroethics," of which the definition and purpose often remain unclear. We discuss the problems of informed consent, free will, sense of self, and personality in light of recent neuroscientific progress. Due to distinct categories and frames of reference, these philosophical-ethical terms cannot be limited only to the brain; the development of systematic relations is suggested. This accounts for the "special ethical position of the brain." It is concluded that only this sense can neuroethics account for the ethical complexity in neuropsychiatric disorders.

Ethics, Medical↗

Is it always unethical to use a placebo in a clinical trial?

BACKGROUND TO THE DEBATE: Placebos are used in trials to conceal whether a treatment is being given or not and hence to control for the psychosomatic effects of offering treatment. Placebo-controlled trials are controversial. Critics of such trials argue that if a proven effective therapy exists, a placebo should not be used. But proponents argue that placebo trials are still crucial to prove the efficacy and safety of many treatments.

Ethics, Medical↗