Abstract

Psychiatrists are the health care professionals most frequently called upon to determine the competency of a patient to refuse treatment. The motives for determining competency vary in morally significant ways. This paper explores what I term ‘the ideal motivational situation’ for determining a patient's competency: a desire to respect the patient's autonomy, a desire to promote the patient's overall best interests, and a belief that when these two motives conflict the patient's autonomy should not be dismissed out of hand as a partial patient interest which is naturally outweighed by the totality of his or her interests. I claim that in a liberal, democratic society autonomy ought to trump best interests and be the sole criterion of patient competence. I conclude by offering an essentially aesthetic criterion for determining autonomy.