Affiliation:
1. Birkbeck, University of London, Bloomsbury, London, United Kingdom
Abstract
AbstractAccording to one influential view, requirements to elicit consent for medical interventions and other interactions gain their rationale from the respect we owe to each other as autonomous, or self-governing, rational agents. Yet, the popular presumption that consent has a central role to play in legitimate intervention extends beyond the domain of cases where autonomous agency is present to cases where far from fully autonomous agents make choices that, as likely as not, are going to be against their own best interest. The question of how we should understand the rationale for eliciting consent in this range of “nonideal” cases is comparatively ill understood. In this paper, I explore the prospects of accounting for consent requirements in such “nonideal” cases by appealing to a set of agency-based interests, including an interest in playing a meaningful part in joint decisions affecting ourselves and others.
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Subject
Philosophy,General Medicine,Issues, ethics and legal aspects
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Patients as Experts, Participatory Sense-Making, and Relational Autonomy;Crítica (México D. F. En línea);2024-06-14
2. An Examination of the Married Body of a Woman as Reflected Through Marital Rape in Nigeria;Sustainable Development Goals Series;2024
3. Bioethics and the Contours of Autonomy;The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy: A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine;2022-08-01
4. Clinical and Organizational Ethics: Challenges to Methodology and Practice;HEC Forum;2020-07-31
5. Bioethics in the Ruins;The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy: A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine;2020-05-21