alexa Asymmetries of Patient Autonomy and Paternalism
ISSN: 2155-9627

Journal of Clinical Research & Bioethics
Open Access

Like us on:
OMICS International organises 3000+ Global Conferenceseries Events every year across USA, Europe & Asia with support from 1000 more scientific Societies and Publishes 700+ Open Access Journals which contains over 50000 eminent personalities, reputed scientists as editorial board members.

Open Access Journals gaining more Readers and Citations

700 Journals and 15,000,000 Readers Each Journal is getting 25,000+ Readers

This Readership is 10 times more when compared to other Subscription Journals (Source: Google Analytics)

Research Article

Asymmetries of Patient Autonomy and Paternalism

Dragan Pavlovic1* and Alexander Spassov2

1Research Director, Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Ernst Moritz Arndt University, Greifswald, Germany

2Resident Fellow, Doctor of Dental Medicine, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany

*Corresponding Author:
Dragan Pavlovic
Research Director
Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine
Ernst Moritz Arndt University
Friedrich Loeffler Strasse 23b
17487 Greifswald, Germany
Tel: (49) 3834 86 58 48
E-mail: [email protected]

Received date: November 25, 2010; Accepted date: May 18, 2011; Published date: May 20, 2011

Citation: Pavlovic D, Spassov A (2011) Asymmetries of Patient Autonomy and Paternalism. J Clinic Res Bioeth 2:112. doi: 10.4172/2155-9627.1000112

Copyright: © 2011 Pavlovic D, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

 

Abstract

It has been questioned whether it is morally acceptable for a husband or son [the closest family members] to be permitted to convince a terminally ill patient, an 83-year-old woman, contrary to her initial will, to continue to receive intensive but "futile" therapy. This implies another question: whether by this act of persuasion, the patient's autonomy is being seriously violated. We think that reviving the motivation to continue to live is not necessarily violating a person's autonomy, even if the objective quality of life would be unsatisfactory and that such an act also cannot be characterized as a restriction of a person's autonomy. Here it is maintained that there is an important asymmetry in the meaning of the principle of autonomy and of paternalism: while being quite permissive, when applied in cases of an eventual decision in favour of life, they are quite limited when applied as principles of conduct for decisions concerning the termination of life. The emotional concerns of some other actors in the patients close emotional circle [family members], could also be important for such decisions, if they had played an important role in the development of the patient's ethical and moral motives and attitudes during his/her lifetime. It would be similarly appropriate for psychologists and social psychiatrists to devote intensive attention to this question. If the latter failed to reach a rational decision, then it must be accepted that the "pro vita" decision cannot be refuted and that probably some forms of encouragement to accept advanced forms of life maintenance should be offered to the patients by those who are within her/his close emotional circle.

Keywords

Share This Page

Additional Info

Loading
Loading Please wait..
 
Peer Reviewed Journals
 
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2017-18
 
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

 
© 2008-2017 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version
adwords