Graduate studies at Western
Synthese 57 (2):205 - 224 (1983)
|Abstract||Psychiatrists are frequently called upon to make assessments of the rationality or irrationality of persons for a variety of medical-legal purposes. A key category is that of evaluations of a patient's capacity to grant informed consent for a medical procedure. A diagnosis of mental illness is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for a finding of incompetence. The notion of competency to grant consent, which is a mixed psychiatric-legal concept, shares some features with philosophical conceptions of rationality, but differs from them in a number of important respects. This article describes the actual practice of psychiatrists when making such judgments, along with the standards of competency they employ. A comparison is made between those notions of competency and predominant philosophical conceptions of rationality.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Xavier Vanmechelen (1998). Does Rationality Presuppose Irrationality. Philosophical Explorations 1 (2):126 – 139.
Milan Zafirovski (2003). What is Rationality? Selected Conceptions From Social Theory. Social Epistemology 17 (1):13 – 44.
Constance E. Roland & Richard M. Foxx (2003). Self-Respect: A Neglected Concept. Philosophical Psychology 16 (2):247 – 288.
Matthew S. Bedke (2010). Rationalist Restrictions and External Reasons. Philosophical Studies 151 (1):39 - 57.
Gareth S. Owen, Fabian Freyenhagen, Genevra Richardson & Matthew Hotopf (2009). Mental Capacity and Decisional Autonomy: An Interdisciplinary Challenge. Inquiry 52 (1):79 – 107.
Richard Reiner (1995). Arguments Against the Possibility of Perfect Rationality. Minds and Machines 5 (3):373-89.
Deborah Bowman (2011). Informed Consent: A Primer for Clinical Practice. Cambridge University Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads4 ( #189,470 of 740,077 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?