David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Cambridge University Press (2002)
Why has autonomy been a leading idea in philosophical writing on bioethics, and why has trust been marginal? In this important book, Onora O'Neill suggests that the conceptions of individual autonomy so widely relied on in bioethics are philosophically and ethically inadequate, and that they undermine rather than support relations of trust. She shows how Kant's non-individualistic view of autonomy provides a stronger basis for an approach to medicine, science and biotechnology, and does not marginalize untrustworthiness, while also explaining why trustworthy individuals and institutions are often undeservingly mistrusted. Her arguments are illustrated with issues raised by practices such as the use of genetic information by the police or insurers, research using human tissues, uses of new reproductive technologies, and media practices for reporting on medicine, science and technology. Autonomy and Trust in Bioethics will appeal to a wide range of readers in ethics, bioethics and related disciplines.
|Keywords||Medical ethics Bioethics Bioethics Philosophy Autonomy Trust|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Buy the book||$81.58 used (21% off) $85.34 new (18% off) $99.00 direct from Amazon Amazon page|
|Call number||R725.5.O544 2002|
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
Stephen John (2010). In Defence of Bad Science and Irrational Policies: An Alternative Account of the Precautionary Principle. [REVIEW] Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 13 (1):3 - 18.
Kjartan Koch Mikalsen (2010). Testimony and Kant's Idea of Public Reason. Res Publica 16 (1):23-40.
Diane Perpich (2010). Vulnerability and the Ethics of Facial Tissue Transplantation. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 7 (2):173-185.
Thomas W. Simpson (2012). What Is Trust? Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 93 (4):550-569.
Marko Ahteensuu (2012). Assumptions of the Deficit Model Type of Thinking: Ignorance, Attitudes, and Science Communication in the Debate on Genetic Engineering in Agriculture. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25 (3):295-313.
Similar books and articles
Toby L. Schonfeld (2003). McLeod, Carolyn, Self-Trust and Reproductive Autonomy. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 24 (3):279-282.
Carolyn McLeod (2003). A Review of Autonomy and Trust in Bioethics, by Onora O'Neill. American Journal of Medical Genetics 121 (1):85-87.
Laurence B. Mccullough (2011). Was Bioethics Founded on Historical and Conceptual Mistakes About Medical Paternalism? Bioethics 25 (2):66-74.
Rosamond Rhodes (2001). Understanding the Trusted Doctor and Constructing a Theory of Bioethics. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 22 (6):493-504.
Sara Goering (2009). Postnatal Reproductive Autonomy: Promoting Relational Autonomy and Self-Trust in New Parents. Bioethics 23 (1):9-19.
Trudy Govier (1993). Self-Trust, Autonomy, and Self-Esteem. Hypatia 8 (1):99 - 120.
Barbara Secker (1999). The Appearance of Kant's Deontology in Contemporary Kantianism: Concepts of Patient Autonomy in Bioethics. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 24 (1):43 – 66.
Sheila McLean (2010). Autonomy, Consent and the Law. Routledge-Cavendish.
Yvette E. Pearson (2008). Onora O'Neill, Autonomy and Trust in Bioethics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), Pp. XI + 213. Utilitas 20 (2):248-250.
Jason D. Morrow (2003). O'Neill, Onora. Autonomy and Trust in Bioethics. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 24 (3):261-269.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads68 ( #20,453 of 1,098,129 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #78,521 of 1,098,129 )
How can I increase my downloads?