AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
Questioning life choices8/16/2023 ![]() ![]() Whilst there may be occasions when we feel that others do not determine our choices and our choices cannot benefit from discussion with them, this in fact happens very seldom. It is further postulated that, to be genuinely autonomous, we are required to take seriously the social implications of our choices. For example, if our choices jeopardise public health, potentially harm others, or require a scarce resource for which no funds are available, others can justifiably curb our exercising of autonomy. First, we need to know that respect for autonomy has only prima facie standing and competing moral considerations can sometimes override it. This is evident from the nature of autonomy itself as well as the implications of ‘choice’ from the consequentialist approach. Nonetheless, respect for autonomy is not an absolute principle within healthcare in general. Hence, respecting patients’ choices seems to be a way of recognising their moral status as individuals and their capacity for self-determination ( 3). Health care practice encompasses situations in which choices are given and decisions are made, offering frequent opportunities for patients to exercise choice and for practitioners to respect these choices. ![]() At the same time, the ability to exercise choice is highly valued in many cultures as an expression of individual identity and autonomy. Furthermore, Beauchamp and Childress contend that, in some cases, health professionals are obliged to increase the options available to patients, whereby many autonomous actions could not occur without the health professionals and health organisation cooperating to make these options available. ![]() Arguably, there is a fundamental obligation to ensure that patients have the right to choose as well as the right to accept or to decline information ( 2). For example, regarding any treatment offered to patients, it is believed that giving them choices will not just enhance their autonomy but also better inform them about their health conditions and the available treatments ( 1). Choice is tied to the notion of individual autonomy or freedom, a concept that has emerged largely in ethical theories of the good. So, this brings us to the question of, is there a special moral duty and obligation for health professionals to always offer a choice to patients? Or, are there situations where some degree of limited choice may be justifiable, in order to promote the principles of beneficence, non-maleficence and justice?Īutonomy has emerged as one of the most frequently referenced concepts in recent healthcare practice. However, choice itself, comes with responsibility, that is one which is accountable for their choice and decision-making, and arguably, one choice usually impacts on other people particularly when resources are scarce. Healthcare professionals in general, are expected to offer choice, simply because it will promote and enhance autonomy, but also it is the right thing to do. It is suggested that there is always probable conflict between allowing greater choice for consumers and changing healthcare policy that is directed more towards standardised healthcare provision ( 1). ![]() Today, despite of the meaningful intention of promoting choice to patients, it is not always possible to do this, especially if we look at the implications of such choice from different perspectives. ![]()
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |