BMC Medical Ethics 20 (1):1-15 (2019)

Background Respect for autonomy is a key concept in contemporary bioethics and end-of-life ethics in particular. Despite this status, an individualistic interpretation of autonomy is being challenged from the perspective of different theoretical traditions. Many authors claim that the principle of respect for autonomy needs to be reconceptualised starting from a relational viewpoint. Along these lines, the notion of relational autonomy is attracting increasing attention in medical ethics. Yet, others argue that relational autonomy needs further clarification in order to be adequately operationalised for medical practice. To this end, we examined the meaning, foundations, and uses of relational autonomy in the specific literature of end-of-life care ethics. Methods Using PRESS and PRISMA procedures, we conducted a systematic review of argument-based ethics publications in 8 major databases of biomedical, philosophy, and theology literature that focused on relational autonomy in end-of-life care. Full articles were screened. All included articles were critically appraised, and a synthesis was produced. Results Fifty publications met our inclusion criteria. Twenty-eight articles were published in the last 5 years; publications were originating from 18 different countries. Results are organized according to: an individualistic interpretation of autonomy; critiques of this individualistic interpretation of autonomy; relational autonomy as theoretically conceptualised; relational autonomy as applied to clinical practice and moral judgment in end-of-life situations. Conclusions Three main conclusions were reached. First, literature on relational autonomy tends to be more a ‘reaction against’ an individualistic interpretation of autonomy rather than be a positive concept itself. Dichotomic thinking can be overcome by a deeper development of the philosophical foundations of autonomy. Second, relational autonomy is a rich and complex concept, formulated in complementary ways from different philosophical sources. New dialogue among traditionally divergent standpoints will clarify the meaning. Third, our analysis stresses the need for dialogical developments in decision making in end-of-life situations. Integration of these three elements will likely lead to a clearer conceptualisation of relational autonomy in end-of-life care ethics. This should in turn lead to better decision-making in real-life situations.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1186/s12910-019-0417-3
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 58,880
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

Principles of Biomedical Ethics.Tom L. Beauchamp - 1979 - Oxford University Press.
Personal Autonomy and Society.Marina A. L. Oshana - 1998 - Journal of Social Philosophy 29 (1):81-102.

View all 39 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Care Perspective and Autonomy.Marian A. Verkerk - 2001 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 4 (3):289-294.
Relational Professional Autonomy.Chris Macdonald - 2002 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 11 (3):282-289.
Nurse Autonomy as Relational.Chris MacDonald - 2002 - Nursing Ethics 9 (2):194-201.


Added to PP index

Total views
8 ( #956,531 of 2,426,357 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #542,164 of 2,426,357 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes