Journal of Applied Philosophy 37 (1):118-140 (2020)

Authors
Jonathan Lewis
Dublin City University
Abstract
Shared Decision Making (‘SDM’) is one of the most significant developments in Western health care practices in recent years. Whereas traditional models of care operate on the basis of the physician as the primary medical decision maker, SDM requires patients to be supported to consider options in order to achieve informed preferences by mutually sharing the best available evidence. According to its proponents, SDM is the right way to interpret the clinician-patient relationship because it fulfils the ethical imperative of respecting patient autonomy. However, there is no consensus about how decisions in SDM contexts relate to the principle of respect for autonomy. In response, I demonstrate that in order to make decisions about what treatment they will or will not receive, patients will be required to meet different conditions depending on the approach proponents of SDM take to understanding personal autonomy. Due to the fact that different conceptions of autonomy yield different obligations, I argue that if physicians and patients satisfied all the conditions described in standard accounts of SDM, then SDM would undermine patient autonomy.
Keywords Shared Decision Making  Autonomy  Sovereignty  Capacity  Relational Autonomy  Recognition  Medical Decisions  Informed Consent
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2019, 2020
DOI 10.1111/japp.12383
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Does Shared Decision Making Respect a Patient's Relational Autonomy?Jonathan Lewis - 2019 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 25 (6):1063-1069.
Shared Decision-Making and Patient Autonomy.Lars Sandman & Christian Munthe - 2009 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 30 (4):289-310.
Deciding for the Incompetent.Eric Vogelstein - 2017 - In John K. Davis (ed.), Ethics at the End of Life: New Issues and Arguments. New York: Routledge. pp. 108-125.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2019-06-24

Total views
104 ( #89,542 of 2,340,252 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
51 ( #11,937 of 2,340,252 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes