liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Paternalism:The Conflict Between Autonomy And Beneficence In The Case Of The Temporarily Mentally Ill Patients
Linköping University, Department of Culture and Communication, Centre for Applied Ethics.
2005 (Swedish)Independent thesis Advanced level (degree of Master (One Year))Student thesis
Abstract [en]

The health care formulation of the principle of autonomy can be expressed as follows; ‘you shall not treat a patient without the informed consent of the patient, or his or her lawfulsurrogate, except in narrowly defined emergencies’. The principle of beneficence refers to a moral obligation to act for the benefit of others. In heath care, the good or benefit in question is the restoration of the health of the patient. In fulfilling this obligation of beneficence, the physician sometimes intentionally overrides the patient’s preferences or actions for the purpose of benefiting the patient. This is called paternalism. It therefore amounts to a violation of the principle of autonomy and hence there arises a tension or conflict between autonomy and beneficence.

The principle of autonomy claims to be pre-eminent to the principle of beneficence and vice versa. Both have their arguments as well as their limitations. However, there is the need for at least weak paternalism for the mentally ill patients because of their diminished autonomy. But in the case of the temporarily mentally ill patient whose autonomy is both restored and diminished following the periodic and intermittent occurrence of his or her mental illness, there is a need to go deeper to find justification for paternalistic intervention.

Both act and rule utilitarianism will find justification for paternalism in this case because the consequence of the action will be greater good for both the patient and the society. Kantianism will give it support from the point of view that the intention is to restore the autonomy of the patient by not using him or her as a means but as and end in himself or herself. Beauchamp and Childress will equally throw their weight behind the justification since prima facie obligations could be overridden in a conflict situation and since restricting a short term autonomy to protect and advance long term autonomy will appeal to common morality.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2005. , 82 p.
Keyword [en]
Ethics, Paternalism, Autonomy, Beneficence, Temporarily mentally ill patients
Keyword [sv]
Etik
National Category
Philosophy
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-2912ISRN: LIU-CTE-AE-EX--05/04--SEOAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-2912DiVA: diva2:20255
Presentation
(English)
Uppsok
humaniora/teologi
Available from: 2005-06-14 Created: 2005-06-14

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(569 kB)3130 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 569 kBChecksum MD5
ee8d5874dc82f7d21b18503c428dd5678a5544678e8b180ee121518c57ef907650bac2da
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
Centre for Applied Ethics
Philosophy

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 3130 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 1824 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf