Bioethics 27 (9):493-499 (2013)

Personal autonomy presupposes the notion of rationality. What is not so clear is whether, and how, a compromise of rationality to various degrees will diminish a person's autonomy. In bioethical literature, three major types of threat to the rationality of a patient's medical decision are identified: insufficient information, irrational beliefs/desires, and influence of different framing effects. To overcome the first problem, it is suggested that patients be provided with information about their diseases and treatment choices according to the objective standard. I shall explain how this should be finessed. Regarding the negative impact of irrational beliefs/desires, some philosophers have argued that holding irrational beliefs can still be an expression of autonomy. I reject this argument because the degree of autonomy of a decision depends on the degree of rationality of the beliefs or desires on which the decision is based. Hence, to promote patient autonomy, we need to eliminate irrational beliefs by the provision of evidence and good arguments. Finally, I argue that the way to smooth out the framing effects is to present the same information in different perspectives: it is too often assumed that medical information can always be given in a complete and unadorned manner. This article concludes with a cautionary note that the protection of patient autonomy requires much more time and effort than the current practice usually allows
Keywords framing effect  informed consent  autonomy  rationality
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2012.01973.x
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: 65,740
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

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Autonomy, Consent and the Law.Sheila McLean - 2010 - Routledge-Cavendish.
Informed Consent and Relational Conceptions of Autonomy.N. Stoljar - 2011 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 36 (4):375-384.
An Economic Theory of Patient Decision-Making.Douglas O. Stewart & Joseph P. DeMarco - 2005 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 2 (3):153-164.
Shared Decision-Making and Patient Autonomy.Lars Sandman & Christian Munthe - 2009 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 30 (4):289-310.
The Nocebo Effect of Informed Consent.Shlomo Cohen - 2014 - Bioethics 28 (3):147-154.
Informed Consent, Autonomy, and the Law.David B. Annis - 1984 - Philosophy Research Archives 10:249-259.
Precedent Autonomy and Subsequent Consent.John K. Davis - 2004 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 7 (3):267-291.


Added to PP index

Total views
152 ( #72,557 of 2,462,792 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #449,387 of 2,462,792 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes