Fostering relational autonomy in end-of-life care: a procedural approach and three-dimensional decision-making model

Author:

Foo Kar-FaiORCID,Lin Ya-PingORCID,Lin Cheng-PeiORCID,Chen Yu-ChunORCID

Abstract

Respect for patient autonomy is paramount in resolving ethical tensions in end-of-life care. The concept of relational autonomy has contributed to this debate; however, scholars often use this concept in a fragmented manner. This leads to partial answers on ascertaining patients’ true wishes, meaningfully engaging patients’ significant others, balancing interests among patients and significant others, and determining clinicians’ obligations to change patients’ unconventional convictions to enhance patient autonomy. A satisfactory solution based on relational autonomy must incorporate patients’ competence (apart from decisional capacity), authenticity (their true desires or beliefs) and the involvement level of their significant others. To that end, we argue that John Christman’s procedural approach to relational autonomy provides critical insights, such as the diachronic or socio-historical personhood, sustained critical reflection and his recent explication of the nature of asymmetrical relationships and helpful interlocutors. This study reviews Christman’s account, proposes minor modifications and advocates for an integrated three-dimensional model for medical decision-making. Clarifying the relationship among the three elements promotes an ethical framework with a coherent understanding of relational autonomy. This model not only provides a descriptive and normative framework for end-of-life care practice but also reconsiders the nature of the clinician–patient relationship and its normative implications. We further present a case study to illustrate the merits of our proposed model. Altogether, our proposal will help navigate complex medical decision-making, foster trust and negotiate shared values between patients and their significant others, particularly in end-of-life care.

Funder

Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan

Publisher

BMJ

Reference58 articles.

1. Beauchamp TL , Childress JF . Principles of BIOMEDICAL ethics. 8th edn. New York: Oxford University Press, 2019.

2. Mackenzie C , Stoljar N . Relational Autonomy: Feminist Perspectives on Autonomy, Agency, and the Social Self. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.

3. Stoljar N . Feminist perspectives on autonomy. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2022 Edition), Available: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-autonomy/ [Accessed 27 Nov 2023].

4. Stoljar N , Mackenzie C . Relational autonomy in feminist bioethics. In: Rogers WA , Scully JL , Carter SM , et al , eds. The Routledge Handbook of Feminist Bioethics. New York: Routledge, 2023: 71–83. doi:10.4324/9781003016885

5. Relational autonomy: moving beyond the limits of isolated individualism;Walter;Pediatrics,2014

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3