Autonomy: 1. Does the concept of autonomy impair the dispensation of adequate care? What are some of the issues that may arise when autonomy is understood as "non-interference"? Are there any justifications that can be made for pursuing a course of treatment when it is against the patient's wishes? Do you agree with Ackerman's assertion that "true respect for a patient's autonomy may require the physician to intervene, to deviate from the patient's stated preferences? 2. Discuss the impact of moral relativism on medical practice. Should medical professionals disregard a patient's religious values in the pursuit of treatment? What should doctors do when a patient refuses treatment (either for themselves or their children) on religious grounds? Should the wishes of parents be respected if they, for example, refuse to vaccinate their child on moral or religious grounds?

In the medical system, conflict arises in the autonomy of the patients with respect to the type of medication and course they want to take. The issue arises in determining the best position for the patients on both the patient and the professional setup. The autonomy of the patient should be a central value as that determines medical ethics. The patient has the right to make the right decisions on their own body. The research states that “everyone is free to arrange their life according to his or her own desire” (Song, 2018). In terms of respect for autonomy can be in the form of confidentiality, truth-telling, and privacy. This gives the patient the power of decision-making. Autonomy means the patients make their own choices and are able to work on their own will and interest. The judgment of the patients gives them the capacity to practice their own values. In the process, negative autonomy is the decision of refusing a specific medical measure. Positive autonomy is having a positive response or obtaining specific medical measures (Roberts, 2017). The imparity depends on the types of response from the patient’s behavior. Self-determination has the negative right to non-interference, it means the right to take a decision in one’s own life without being controlled by any other external force. Like patient autonomy, there is surgeon autonomy to consider. It determines the possible intervention to give certain medications for the benefit of the treatment. The patient and the surgeon is a dynamic position and that influence the decision-making process. In case of the advanced disease, the decision-making process becomes static and that becomes a limited benefit. Shared decision-making helps the patient to exhibit autonomy and address concerns and questions. But in this case, also, reviewing all the processes that are in hand can help to give autonomy and provide a sense of control. If autonomy is misunderstood as non-interference, it provides a state of non-discussion and limits the benefit. There are no justifications, if the patient is dissatisfied with a course of treatment, it should not be taken ahead. At any stage of the disease, the patient’s autonomy has to be considered and the discussion should be healthy between the patient and the surgeon. Ackerman’s assertion says that “true respect for a patient’s autonomy may require the physician to intervene, to deviate from the patient’s stated preferences”. I do not agree with Ackerman’s assertion. I believe that the patient and physician autonomy should be dynamic and the patient should have the right to choose their course of medicine. Most of the surgeons will have a strong impression to interfere and want to contribute to the decision. It should be that the surgeon’s perception of the patient expectation is vital as that is true respect. Moral relativism tends to minimize harm to others but that might remain a contradiction in medical practice. Belief is closely associated with moral personality and moral judgment. And individual actions in a turbulent situation. In case of an epidemic, if the individual is taking a decision not to take medication, it involves risky behavior not only for the individual but for society. In this case, the intervention from the medical practitioners is much regarded by it not only involves the individual but also the society (Forsyth, 2021). As stated before in the medical professional setup the patients’ cultural values, and religious values have to be considered in the pursuit of treatment. This has both benefits, if cultural and religious values are considered in the hospital, it creates more trust among the patients as that creates oneness and better understanding. The medical professionals and the nurses should be trained to understand the religious beliefs of that particular community to treat them accordingly. The patient and doctors are in the common ground of discussion when the doctor can talk about the benefits of the treatment and the vulnerability of the condition but they cannot force the family members to take the medications. If the case will affect the community as that becomes a communicable disease, the intervention from the doctors is crucial and important. In this case, the doctors should take a stand and can control the situation. As per moral ethics, the wishes of the parents should be considered as they are the deciding factor in the case. On moral and religious grounds, these have to be avoided and medical practitioners can only do so much for convenience but it is in the hands of the parents to consider it. To conclude, the conflict arises in the autonomy between the patient and doctor relationship. The ultimate decision should be taken by the patient as they are the ones experiencing the reality of the medical procedures. By allowing the patients to choose we are exhibiting moral ethics if that is determined, it creates an equilibrium in the state. References Forsyth, D. R. (2021). Moral Relativists Resist Health Mandates during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Personality and Individual Differences, 110709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.110709 Roberts, J. T. F. (2017). Autonomy, Competence and Non-interference. HEC Forum, 30(3), 235–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10730-017-9344-1 Song, J. (2018). Autonomy and Intervention in Medical Practice. Open Journal of Philosophy, 08(03), 294–307. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojpp.2018.83021

Solved: Autonomy: 1. Does the concept of autonomy impair the dispensation of a

Home
questions and answers
autonomy 1 does the concept of autonomy impair the dispensation of ade

Question

Autonomy: 1. Does the concept of autonomy impair the dispensation of adequate care? What are some of the issues that may arise when autonomy is understood as "non-interference"? Are there any justifications that can be made for pursuing a course of treatment when it is against the patient's wishes? Do you agree with Ac