Archived Abstracts
Proceeding Without Consent: The Ethics of Disregarding Patient Preference for Paternalistic Reasons
Location
Room 215, Schewel Hall
Access Type
Open Access
Entry Number
53
Start Date
4-8-2020 2:00 PM
End Date
4-8-2020 2:15 PM
Department
Philosophy
Abstract
The last few decades have brought to the medical community a level of accountability that it has never seen prior. Modern medicine’s introduction to patient rights and new regulations focused on respecting patient rights have since left open the question of how to handle scenarios where people who might require treatment but are unable, usually for some reason of cognitive capacity, to express preference or give valid consent to treatment. The intent behind this thesis is to evaluate the ethical nature of forced treatment, specifically in cases of psychological impairment. To do this, it will require an in-depth review and consideration of ‘autonomy’; determine what is required for a person to be considered ‘autonomous’ and discuss when it might be morally permissible to violate an individual’s ‘autonomy.’ This is required so that a solid foundation may be formed in deciding what really is and is not a transgression of an individual’s rights. Furthermore, an evaluation of ethical theory is required, namely, Rights Theory and three ethical principles that are often considered in bioethical determination: beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice. After a review of autonomy is complete, followed by the critiques of the preferred ethical devices, I will then consider the nature of forced treatment and form a conclusion regarding its moral status. Lastly, a proposal will be made considering when and on what grounds Forced Treatment may be deemed a permissible practice despite its non-moral status, with a defense.
Faculty Mentor(s)
Dr. Laura Kicklighter Dr. Nicolas Frank Dr. David Freier
Rights Statement
The right to download or print any portion of this material is granted by the copyright owner only for personal or educational use. The author/creator retains all proprietary rights, including copyright ownership. Any editing, other reproduction or other use of this material by any means requires the express written permission of the copyright owner. Except as provided above, or for any other use that is allowed by fair use (Title 17, §107 U.S.C.), you may not reproduce, republish, post, transmit or distribute any material from this web site in any physical or digital form without the permission of the copyright owner of the material.
Proceeding Without Consent: The Ethics of Disregarding Patient Preference for Paternalistic Reasons
Room 215, Schewel Hall
The last few decades have brought to the medical community a level of accountability that it has never seen prior. Modern medicine’s introduction to patient rights and new regulations focused on respecting patient rights have since left open the question of how to handle scenarios where people who might require treatment but are unable, usually for some reason of cognitive capacity, to express preference or give valid consent to treatment. The intent behind this thesis is to evaluate the ethical nature of forced treatment, specifically in cases of psychological impairment. To do this, it will require an in-depth review and consideration of ‘autonomy’; determine what is required for a person to be considered ‘autonomous’ and discuss when it might be morally permissible to violate an individual’s ‘autonomy.’ This is required so that a solid foundation may be formed in deciding what really is and is not a transgression of an individual’s rights. Furthermore, an evaluation of ethical theory is required, namely, Rights Theory and three ethical principles that are often considered in bioethical determination: beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice. After a review of autonomy is complete, followed by the critiques of the preferred ethical devices, I will then consider the nature of forced treatment and form a conclusion regarding its moral status. Lastly, a proposal will be made considering when and on what grounds Forced Treatment may be deemed a permissible practice despite its non-moral status, with a defense.