Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


PhilPapersPhilPeoplePhilArchivePhilEventsPhilJobs
Switch to: References

Add citations

You mustlogin to add citations.
  1. The right not to know and the obligation to know.Ben Davies -2020 -Journal of Medical Ethics 46 (5):300-303.
    There is significant controversy over whether patients have a ‘right not to know’ information relevant to their health. Some arguments for limiting such a right appeal to potential burdens on others that a patient’s avoidable ignorance might generate. This paper develops this argument by extending it to cases where refusal of relevant information may generate greater demands on a publicly funded healthcare system. In such cases, patients may have an ‘obligation to know’. However, we cannot infer from the fact that (...) a patient has an obligation to know that she does not also have a right not to know. The right not to know is held against medical professionals at a formal institutional level. We have reason to protect patients’ control over the information that they receive, even if in individual instances patients exercise this control in ways that violate obligations. (shrink)
    Direct download(6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Mandatory Disclosure and Medical Paternalism.Emma C. Bullock -2016 -Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 19 (2):409-424.
    Medical practitioners are duty-bound to tell their patients the truth about their medical conditions, along with the risks and benefits of proposed treatments. Some patients, however, would rather not receive medical information. A recent response to this tension has been to argue that that the disclosure of medical information is not optional. As such, patients do not have permission to refuse medical information. In this paper I argue that, depending on the context, the disclosure of medical information can undermine the (...) patient’s ability to exercise her autonomy or have therapeutically detrimental effects. In the light of these insights I go on to develop a context-sensitive approach to medical disclosure. The advantage of this account is that it addresses concerns on both sides of the debate; whilst it acknowledges that patients do not have an exercisable ‘right not to know,’ it allows that in some cases medical information ought to be withheld. (shrink)
    Direct download(3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  • Paternalism and autonomy: views of patients and providers in a transitional country.Lucija Murgic,Philip C. Hébert,Slavica Sovic &Gordana Pavlekovic -2015 -BMC Medical Ethics 16 (1):1-9.
    BackgroundPatient autonomy is a fundamental, yet challenging, principle of professional medical ethics. The idea that individual patients should have the freedom to make choices about their lives, including medical matters, has become increasingly prominent in current literature. However, this has not always been the case, especially in communist countries where paternalistic attitudes have been interwoven into all relationships including medical ones. Patients’ expectations and the role of the doctor in the patient-physician relationship are changing. Croatia, as a transitional country, is (...) currently undergoing this particular process.MethodsQualitative research was conducted by means of six focus group discussions held in the years 2012 and 2013 in Croatia. Focus groups were held separately with each of the following: first year and final year medical students, physicians engaged in medical ethics education, physicians practicing in a clinical hospital, family medicine residents and individuals representing patients with chronic disease. This research specifically addresses issues related to patient autonomy, in particular, the principles of truth telling, confidentiality, and informed consent. All focus group discussions were audio taped and then transcribed verbatim and systematized according to acknowledged qualitative analysis methods.Results and discussionPatient autonomy is much more than a simple notion defined as the patient’s right to make treatment decisions independently. It has to be understood in context of the broader socio-cultural setting. At present, both patients and medical doctors in Croatia are increasingly appreciating the importance of promoting the principle of autonomy in medical decision-making. However, the current views of medical students, physicians and patients reveal inconsistencies.Conclusions Knowing how to respect the various facets of patients’ autonomy should be part of physician’s professional duties, and also be reflected in his or her core clinical competencies. For this reason greater importance should be dedicated to patient autonomy issues in medical education in Croatia. (shrink)
    Direct download(5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  • Interests and Choices in Determining Death by Neurological Criteria.Mehrunisha Suleman &Aasim I. Padela -2024 -American Journal of Bioethics 24 (1):118-121.
    Death by neurological criteria (DNC) continues to stir global controversy. Philosophers and theologians contest its moral significance, clinicians and bioscientists debate its probative accuracy, a...
    Direct download(2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Assisted Dying and the Proper Role of Patient Autonomy.Emma C. Bullock -2015 - In Jukka Varelius & Michael Cholbi,New Directions in the Ethics of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia. Cham: Springer Verlag. pp. 1-16.
    A governing principle in medical ethics is respect for patient autonomy. This principle is commonly drawn upon in order to argue for the permissibility of assisted dying. In this paper I explore the proper role that respect for patient autonomy should play in this context. I argue that the role of autonomy is not to identify a patient’s best interests, but instead to act as a side-constraint on action. The surprising conclusion of the paper is that whether or not it (...) is in the best interests for the patient to die is a morally objective matter. This allows for the possibility that it can be in the best interests of the patient to die even if she autonomously considers it to be in her best interest to continue living. I argue that concerns about ‘mandatory’ euthanasia can be met when patient autonomy is respected as a side-constraint on action. Ultimately, this means that assisted dying is permissible, not because the autonomous patient views her suffering to be unbearable, but because it is in her objective best interests and she permitted it via her consent. (shrink)
    Direct download(2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Introduction.Jukka Varelius &Michael Cholbi -2015 - In Jukka Varelius & Michael Cholbi,New Directions in the Ethics of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia. Cham: Springer Verlag.
  • Mental Illness, Lack of Autonomy, and Physician-Assisted Death.Jukka Varelius -2015 - In Jukka Varelius & Michael Cholbi,New Directions in the Ethics of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia. Cham: Springer Verlag. pp. 59-77.
    In this chapter, I consider the idea that physician-assisted death might come into question in the cases of psychiatric patients who are incapable of making autonomous choices about ending their lives. I maintain that the main arguments for physician-assisted death found in recent medical ethical literature support physician-assisted death in some of those cases. After assessing several possible criticisms of what I have argued, I conclude that the idea that physicianassisted death can be acceptable in some cases of psychiatric patients (...) who lack autonomy ought to be taken into account in assessing the moral and legal acceptability of physician-assisted death. (shrink)
    Direct download(2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  

  • [8]ページ先頭

    ©2009-2025 Movatter.jp