Hastings Center Report 47 (4):32-39 (2017)

Abstract
Autonomy and consent have been central values in Western moral and political thought for centuries. One way of understanding the bioethical models that started to develop, especially in the 1970s, is that they were about the fusion of a long-standing professional ethics with the core values underpinning modern political institutions. That there was a need for this kind of fusion is difficult to dispute, especially since the provision of health care has in most developed countries become an ever more important concern of our political institutions, with governments playing a significant role in regulating and facilitating the provision of health care and in many countries even largely organizing it. There is, nevertheless, still room for dispute about how best to achieve this fusion and how to best think about autonomy and consent in a biomedical context. The simplest model we can have is probably about how being a person is largely about having the capacity of autonomous choice and that the main mode through which we exercise autonomy is by providing informed consent. Yet, liberal democracy's core idea that human beings have a high and equal value is also found in other accounts of the person. The human-rights framework provides an alternative model for thinking about personhood and about patient care. The human-rights approach is grounded, not in an account of autonomy, but in an account of the moral and political personhood that people possess merely by being human beings. In this approach, values like dignity and integrity, both highly relevant in a bioethical context, are identified as distinct values rather than being derived from and therefore reduced to respect for autonomous choice. The human-rights approach can supplement the problematic notion of autonomy that has been central to bioethics by placing this notion in a broader, strongly pluralistic framework.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1002/hast.738
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 50,268
External links

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

At the Margins of Moral Personhood.Eva Kittay - 2005 - Ethics 116 (1):100-131.
Informed Consent: Its History, Meaning, and Present Challenges.Tom L. Beauchamp - 2011 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 20 (4):515-523.
Informed Consent and Relational Conceptions of Autonomy.N. Stoljar - 2011 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 36 (4):375-384.
Why Bioethics Needs a Disability Moral Psychology.Joseph A. Stramondo - 2016 - Hastings Center Report 46 (3):22-30.

View all 9 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Use of Human Tissue.Grant Gillett - 2007 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 4 (2):119-127.
Human Dignity, Rights and Self-Control.Michael Joseph Meyer - 1987 - Dissertation, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Human Dignity as a Right.Shaoping Gan - 2009 - Frontiers of Philosophy in China 4 (3):370-384.
Other Signing and Patients' Rights.Qun Gong - 2009 - Philosophy and Culture 36 (7):15-30.
Rights to Health Care.H. Tristram Englehardt - forthcoming - The Foundations of Bioethics, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-07-27

Total views
11 ( #755,439 of 2,325,388 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #667,459 of 2,325,388 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes