Argumentation and informed consent in the doctor–patient relationship
Argumentation theory has much to offer our understanding of the doctor-patient relationship as it plays out in the context of seeking and obtaining consent to treatment. In order to harness the power of argumentation theory in this regard, I argue, it is necessary to take into account
insights from the legal and bioethical dimensions of informed consent, and in particular to account for features of the interaction that make it psychologically complex: that there is a fundamental asymmetry of authority, power and expertise between doctor and patient; that, given the potential
for coercion, it is a challenge to preserve the interactive balance presumed by the requirement of informed consent; and finally that the necessary condition that patients be ‘competent to consent’ may undermine the requirement of respecting patient autonomy. I argue argumentation
theory has the resources to deal with these challenges and expand our knowledge, and appreciation, of the informed consent interaction in health care.
Keywords: argumentation theory; autonomy; competency to consent; doctor-patient interaction; informed consent; medical paternalism
Document Type: Research Article
Publication date: 01 January 2012
- Access Key
- Free content
- Partial Free content
- New content
- Open access content
- Partial Open access content
- Subscribed content
- Partial Subscribed content
- Free trial content