Some limits of informed consent

被引:314
作者
O'Neill, O [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Cambridge Newnham Coll, Cambridge CB3 9DF, England
关键词
D O I
10.1136/jme.29.1.4
中图分类号
B82 [伦理学(道德学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Many accounts of informed consent in medical ethics claim that it is valuable because it supports individual autonomy. Unfortunately there are many distinct conceptions of individual autonomy, and their ethical importance varies. A better reason for taking informed consent seriously is that it provides assurance that patients and others are neither deceived nor coerced. Present debates about the relative importance of generic and specific consent (particularly in the use of human tissues for research and in secondary studies) do not address this issue squarely. Consent is a propositional attitude, so intransitive:complete, wholly specific consent is an illusion. Since the point of consent procedures is to limit deception and coercion, they should be designed to give patients and others control over the amount of information they receive and opportunity to rescind consent already given.
引用
收藏
页码:4 / +
页数:3
相关论文
共 10 条
  • [1] Faden R., Beauchamp T., A history and theory of informed consent, (1986)
  • [2] Rothman D., Strangers at the bedside: A history of how law and ethics transformed medical decision making, (1991)
  • [3] Wolpe P., The triumph of autonomy in American bioethics: A sociological view, Bioethics and Society: Sociological Investigations of the Enterprise of Bioethics, pp. 38-59, (1998)
  • [4] Mill J.S., On liberty, Utilitarianism, On Liberty and Other Essays, (1962)
  • [5] Jenkins S., A sad case of media meddling not reason, The Times, (2000)
  • [6] Dworkin G., The theory and practice of autonomy, (1988)
  • [7] O'Neill O., Autonomy and trust in bioethics, (2002)
  • [8] Human tissue: Ethical and legal issues, Journal of Medical Ethics, 22, pp. 1-3, (1996)
  • [9] Report on human genetic databases: Challenges and opportunities, (2000)
  • [10] The report of The Royal Liverpool Children's Inquiry, (2001)