Journal of General Internal Medicine 23 (6):867-870 (2008)

Authors
Peter H. Schwartz
Indiana University Purdue University, Indianapolis
Abstract
Some experts have argued that patients should routinely be told the specific magnitude and absolute probability of potential risks and benefits of screening tests. This position is motivated by the idea that framing risk information in ways that are less precise violates the ethical principle of respect for autonomy and its application in informed consent or shared decisionmaking. In this Perspective, we consider a number of problems with this view that have not been adequately addressed. The most important challenges stem from the danger that patients will misunderstand the information or have irrational responses to it. Any initiative in this area should take such factors into account and should consider carefully how to apply the ethical principles of respect for autonomy and beneficence.
Keywords risk and benefit data  informed consent  respect for autonomy
Categories (categorize this paper)
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
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.
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk.D. Kahneman & A. Tversky - 1979 - Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society:263--291.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Medical Nihilism.Jacob Stegenga - 2018 - Oxford University Press.
Measuring Effectiveness.Jacob Stegenga - 2015 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 54:62-71.
Ethical and Scientific Issues in Cancer Screening and Prevention.Anya Plutynski - 2012 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 37 (3):310-323.

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Nocebo Effect of Informed Consent.Shlomo Cohen - 2014 - Bioethics 28 (3):147-154.
Autonomy, Consent and the Law.Sheila McLean - 2010 - Routledge-Cavendish.
Autonomy and Negatively Informed Consent.Ulrik Kihlbom - 2008 - Journal of Medical Ethics 34 (3):146-9.
On Taylor on Autonomy and Informed Consent.Jukka Varelius - 2006 - Journal of Value Inquiry 40 (4):451-459.
HIV Testing and Informed Consent.L. Frith - 2005 - Journal of Medical Ethics 31 (12):699-700.
Can Informed Consent to Research Be Adapted to Risk?Danielle Bromwich & Annette Rid - 2015 - Journal of Medical Ethics 41 (7):521-528.
The Informed Consent Process in Obstetrics.Maurice James Mueller - 1996 - Dissertation, The Union Institute
Can Broad Consent Be Informed Consent?M. Sheehan - 2011 - Public Health Ethics 4 (3):226-235.
Is Respect for Autonomy Defensible?James Wilson - 2007 - Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (6):353-356.
Informed Consent as Waiver: The Doctrine Rethought?Emma C. Bullock - 2010 - Ethical Perspectives 17 (4):529-555.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-07-14

Total views
248 ( #32,240 of 2,349,558 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
25 ( #28,151 of 2,349,558 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes