Skip to main content
Log in

Professional Autonomy and the Normative Structure of Medical Practice

  • Published:
Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Professional autonomy is often described as a claim of professionalsthat has to serve primarily their own interests. However, it can also beseen as an element of a professional ideal that can function as astandard for professional, i.e. medical practice. This normativeunderstanding of the medical profession and professional autonomy facesthree threats today. 1) Internal erosion of professional autonomy due toa lack of internal quality control by the medical profession; 2)the increasing upward pressure on health care expenses that calls for ahealth care policy that could imply limitations for the professionalautonomy of physicians; 3) a distorted understanding of theprofession as being based on a formal type of knowledge and relatedtechnology, in which other normative dimensions of medical practice areneglected and which frustrates meaningful communication betweenphysicians and patients. To answer these threats a normative structureanalysis of medical practice is presented, that indicates whichprinciples and norms are constitutive for medical practice. It isconcluded that professional autonomy, normatively understood, should bemaintained to avoid the lure of the technological imperative and toprotect patients against third parties' pressure to undertreatment.However, this professional autonomy can only be maintained if members ofthe profession subject their activities and decisions to a criticalevaluation by other members of the profession and by patients and ifthey continue to critically reflect on the values that regulate today'smedicine.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Anderson I. Hospital errors are number three killer in Australia. New Scientist 146 (1981): 5.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Á rnason V. Towards authentic conversations. Authenticity in the patient-professional relationship. Theoretical Medicine 1995; 15: 227–242.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bierstedt R. Editor's introduction. In: Freidson E, ed. Profession of Medicine. A Study of the Sociology of Applied Knowledge. New York/Hagerstown/San Francisco/ London: Harper & Row, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Brennan TA et al. Incidence of adverse events and negligence in hospitalized patients. Results of the Havard Medical Practices Study I. New England Journal of Medicine 1991; 324: 370–376.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Callahan D. What Kind of Life. The Limits of Medical Progress. New York/London: Simon & Schuster, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Caskey CT. Presymptomatic diagnosis: A firt step towards genetic health care. Science 1993; 262: 48, 49.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cassell EJ. The sorcerer's broom. Medicine's rampant technology. Hastings Center Report 1993; 23(6): 32–39.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Delkeskamp-Hayes C. Is medicine special, and if so, what follows? An attempt at rational reconstruction. In: Delkeskamp-Hayes C, Gardell Cutter MA, eds. Science, Technology, and the Art of Medicine. Dordrecht/Boston/London, 1993.

  9. Dooyeweerd H. A New Critique of Theoretical Thought, Vol. III. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1953–1958.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Finkenstein JL. Biomedicine and technocratic power. Hastings Center Report 1990; 20(4): 13–16.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Freidson E. Profession of Medicine. A Study of the Sociology of Applied Knowledge. New York/Hagerstown/San Francisco/London: Harper & Row, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Freidson E. Profession of Medicine-A Study of the Sociology of Applied Knowledge, 8th edn New York, 1975.

  13. Freidson E. Professional Powers. A Study of the Institutionalization of Formal Knowledge. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Glas G. Clinical practice and the complexity of medical knowledge, European philosophy of medicine and health care. In: Bulletin of the European Society for the Philosophy of Medicine and Health Care, Vol. 3: 3 (special issue): Proceedings of the First World Congress' Medicine and Philosophy,' Paris, 30 May-4 June 1994 (CD-Rom: item 2.5.2), 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Have H ten, Kimsma G. Geneeskunde tussen droom en drama. Voortplanting, ethiek en vooruitgang. Kampen: Kok Agora, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Hawthorne DL, Yurkovich NJ. Caring: The essence of the health-care professions. Humane Health Care International 1996; 12(1): 27–28.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hoogland J, Polder JJ, Jochemsen H. Ethical conditions for health care reform. Distribució n de Recursos Escasos y Opciones Sanitarias [Allocation of Resources and Choices in Health Care]. Fundació n Mapfre Medicina, 1995: 125–140.

  18. Horner JS. Autonomy in the medical profession in the United Kingdom-an historical perspective. This issue, pp. 409–423.

  19. Illich I. Medical Nemesis-The Expropriation of Health. London: Marion Boyars, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kassirer J. Our stubborn quest for diagnostic certainty. A cause of excessive testing. New England Journal of Medicine 1989; 320: 1489–1491.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Klegon D. The sociology of professions. Sociology of Work and Occupations 1978; 5: 259–283.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Klinkert JJ. Inleiding in de medische sociologie. Assen/Maastricht: Van Gorcum, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Klinkert JJ. Macht van artsen-Een bezorgde verkenning van een professie. Assen: Van Gorcum, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Koehn D. The Ground of Professional Ethics. London/New York: Routledge, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Leope LL et al. The nature of adverse events in hospitalized patients. Results of the Harvard Medical Practice Study II. New England Journal of Medicine 1991; 324: 377–384.

    Google Scholar 

  26. MacIntyre A. After Virtue. A Study in Moral Theory. London: Duckworth, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Nys H, Schotsmans P. Professional autonomy in Belgium. This issue, pp. 425–439.

  28. Pellegrino ED. Social duty and moral complicity: The physician's dilemma of divided loyalty. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 1993; 16: 371–391.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Pellegrino ED. Patient and physician autonomy: Conflicting rights and obligations in the physician-patient relationship. Journal of Contemporary Health Law and Policy 1994; 10: 47–68.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Pellegrino ED, Thomasma DC. For the Patient's Good-The Restoration of Beneficence in Health Care. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Polder JJ, Jochemsen H. Professional autonomy in the health care system. This issue, pp. 477–491.

  32. Puolimatka T. Moral Realism and Justification. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Pernick MS. Medical profession. Part I: Medical professionalism. In: Reich WT, ed. Encyclopedia of Bioethics, Vol. 3. New York/London: The Free Press, 1978: 1028–1034.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Sacchini D, Antico L. The professional autonomy of the doctor in Italy. This issue, pp. 441–456.

  35. Strijbos S, ed. De medische ethiek in de branding-Een keuze uit het werk van Gerrit Arie Lindeboom. Amsterdam: Buijten en Schipperheijn, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Unschuld PU. Professionalisierung und ihre Folgen. In: Schipperges H, Seidler E, Unschuld PU, eds. Krankheit, Heilkunst, Heilung. Freiburg/Munich: Alber, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Willigenburg T van, Kloot Meijburg HH. Professionele autonomie: vrijheid in gebondenheid. Medisch Contact 1991; 46(44): 1321–1324.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hoogland, J., Jochemsen, H. Professional Autonomy and the Normative Structure of Medical Practice. Theor Med Bioeth 21, 457–475 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009925423036

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009925423036

Navigation