Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. The Right Not to Know and the Obligation to Know.Ben Davies - 2020 - Journal of Medical Ethics 46 (5):300-303.
    There is significant controversy over whether patients have a ‘right not to know’ information relevant to their health. Some arguments for limiting such a right appeal to potential burdens on others that a patient’s avoidable ignorance might generate. This paper develops this argument by extending it to cases where refusal of relevant information may generate greater demands on a publicly funded healthcare system. In such cases, patients may have an ‘obligation to know’. However, we cannot infer from the fact that (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Ensuring Risk Awareness of Vulnerable Patients in the Post- Montgomery Era: Treading a Fine Line.Sandip Talukdar - forthcoming - Health Care Analysis:1-16.
    The 2015 UK Supreme Court judgment in Montgomery v Lanarkshire reinforces the importance of informed consent to medical treatment. This paper suggests that Montgomery recognises the challenge faced by vulnerable individuals in choosing between treatment options and making decisions with appreciation of information about material risks. The judgment endorses a form of weak paternalism to safeguard such persons, which is not disrespectful of the aggregate principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. But ethical practice requires professionals to tread carefully between (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Paternalism.Jessica Begon - 2016 - Analysis 76 (3):355-373.
  • Ethical Deliberations About Involuntary Treatment: Interviews with Swedish Psychiatrists.Manne Sjöstrand, Lars Sandman, Petter Karlsson, Gert Helgesson, Stefan Eriksson & Niklas Juth - 2015 - BMC Medical Ethics 16 (1):1-12.
    BackgroundInvoluntary treatment is a key issue in healthcare ethics. In this study, ethical issues relating to involuntary psychiatric treatment are investigated through interviews with Swedish psychiatrists.MethodsIn-depth interviews were conducted with eight Swedish psychiatrists, focusing on their experiences of and views on compulsory treatment. In relation to this, issues about patient autonomy were also discussed. The interviews were analysed using a descriptive qualitative approach.ResultsThe answers focus on two main aspects of compulsory treatment. Firstly, deliberations about when and why it was justifiable (...)
    Direct download (12 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • How Sex Selection Undermines Reproductive Autonomy.Tamara Browne - 2017 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 14 (2):195-204.
    Non-medical sex selection is premised on the notion that the sexes are not interchangeable. Studies of individuals who undergo sex selection for non-medical reasons, or who have a preference for a son or daughter, show that they assume their child will conform to the stereotypical roles and norms associated with their sex. However, the evidence currently available has not succeeded in showing that the gender traits and inclinations sought are caused by a “male brain” or a “female brain”. Therefore, as (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Climate Change, Climate Engineering, and the ‘Global Poor’: What Does Justice Require?Marion Hourdequin - 2018 - Ethics, Policy and Environment 21 (3):270-288.
    ABSTRACTIn recent work, Joshua Horton and David Keith argue on distributive and consequentialist grounds that research into solar radiation management geoengineering is justified because the resulting knowledge has the potential to benefit everyone, particularly the ‘global poor.’ I argue that this view overlooks procedural and recognitional justice, and thus relegates to the background questions of how SRM research should be governed. In response to Horton and Keith, I argue for a multidimensional approach to geoengineering justice, which entails that questions of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Does Shared Decision Making Respect a Patient's Relational Autonomy?Jonathan Lewis - 2019 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 25 (6):1063-1069.
    According to many of its proponents, shared decision making ("SDM") is the right way to interpret the clinician-patient relationship because it respects patient autonomy in decision-making contexts. In particular, medical ethicists have claimed that SDM respects a patient's relational autonomy understood as a capacity that depends upon, and can only be sustained by, interpersonal relationships as well as broader health care and social conditions. This paper challenges that claim. By considering two primary approaches to relational autonomy, this paper argues that (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Physicians’ Practices When Frustrating Patients’ Needs: A Comparative Study of Restrictiveness in Offering Abortion and Sedation Therapy.Niels Lynøe - 2014 - Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (5):306-309.
    In this paper it is argued that physicians’ restrictive attitudes in offering abortions during 1946–1965 in Sweden were due to their private values. The values, however, were rarely presented openly. Instead physicians’ values influenced their assessment of the facts presented—that is, the women's’ trustworthiness. In this manner the physicians were able to conceal their private values and impede the women from getting what they wanted and needed. The practice was concealed from both patients and physicians and never publicly discussed. It (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Right or Duty of Information.Sofia R. T. Nunes, Guilhermina Rego & Rui Nunes - 2016 - Nursing Ethics 23 (1):36-47.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark