David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Applied Philosophy 27 (3):273-289 (2010)
Justification for psychiatric paternalism is most easily established where mental illness renders the person mentally incompetent, depriving him of the capacity for rational agency and for autonomy, hence undermining the basis for liberal rights against paternalism. But some philosophers, and no doubt some doctors, have been deeply concerned by the inadequacy of the concept of mental incompetence to encapsulate some apparently appealing cases for psychiatric paternalism. We ought to view mental incompetence as just one subset of a broader justification for psychiatric paternalism. The very basis of liberal limitations on psychiatric paternalism, whether described in terms of rights to autonomy or as respect for differences in values and lifestyles, presupposes a sense of moral persistence, and hence some sufficiently persistent self. Paternalistic intervention is warranted when we are unable to govern our lives in a manner consistent with the goals and values that comprise that ‘self’. One way that can occur is when we lack the mental capacities required for autonomy, such that we are unable to interpret and interact with our environment in order to meaningfully pursue our goals, i.e. mental incompetence. But it can also occur when we are subject to impositions that alter our goals without altering our capacity to pursue them — i.e. when it is our ‘self’ that is impaired rather than our competence
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Phil Bielby (2012). Ulysses Arrangements in Psychiatric Treatment: Towards Proposals for Their Use Based on 'Sharing' Legal Capacity. [REVIEW] Health Care Analysis (2):1-29.
Similar books and articles
Ajit Shah (2011). Mental Competence or Best Interests? Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 18 (2):151-152.
David Checkland (2001). On Risk and Decisional Capacity. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 26 (1):35 – 59.
Toby Williamson (2011). Running Before We Can Walk: Do We Have the Capacity? Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 18 (2):147-150.
John Z. Sadler (2005). Values and Psychiatric Diagnosis. Oxford University Press.
Laurence R. Tancredi (1977). Ethical Policy in Mental Health Care: The Goals of Psychiatric Intervention. Prodist.
Jos V. M. Welie & Sander P. K. Welie (2001). Patient Decision Making Competence: Outlines of a Conceptual Analysis. [REVIEW] Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 4 (2):127-138.
Gareth S. Owen, Fabian Freyenhagen, Genevra Richardson & Matthew Hotopf (2009). Mental Capacity and Decisional Autonomy: An Interdisciplinary Challenge. Inquiry 52 (1):79 – 107.
Jules Holroyd (forthcoming). Clarifying Capacity: Reasons and Value. In Lubomira Radoilska (ed.), Autonomy and Mental Health. Oxford University Press
Jeanette Hewitt (2010). Schizophrenia, Mental Capacity, and Rational Suicide. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 31 (1):63-77.
Rem B. Edwards (1981). Mental Health as Rational Autonomy. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 6 (3):309-322.
Added to index2010-04-11
Total downloads26 ( #117,485 of 1,726,994 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #231,303 of 1,726,994 )
How can I increase my downloads?