Ethics of the fiduciary relationship between patient and physician: the case of informed consent.

IF 3.3 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS Journal of Medical Ethics Pub Date : 2024-12-23 DOI:10.1136/jme-2022-108539
Sophie Ludewigs, Jonas Narchi, Lukas Kiefer, Eva C Winkler
{"title":"Ethics of the fiduciary relationship between patient and physician: the case of informed consent.","authors":"Sophie Ludewigs, Jonas Narchi, Lukas Kiefer, Eva C Winkler","doi":"10.1136/jme-2022-108539","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper serves two purposes: first, the proposition of an ethical fiduciary theory that substantiates the often-cited assertion that the patient-physician relationship is fiduciary in nature; and second, the application of this theory to the case of informed consent. Patients' decision-making preferences vary significantly. While some seek fully autonomous decision-making, others prefer to delegate parts of their decision. Therefore, we propose an ethical fiduciary theory that allows physician and patient to jointly determine the physician's role on a spectrum from fiduciary as advisor to fiduciary as agent. Drawing on legal concepts of the fiduciary relationship and on phenomenological accounts of obligation by Lévinas and Løgstrup, our theory relies on the key attributes of trust, vulnerability and otherness. Finally, practical implications of this theory for the informed consent process are developed: we propose a preassessment of patients' risk and value profiles as well as a restructuring of the oral consent interview and the written consent materials.</p>","PeriodicalId":16317,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Ethics","volume":" ","pages":"59-66"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/jme-2022-108539","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper serves two purposes: first, the proposition of an ethical fiduciary theory that substantiates the often-cited assertion that the patient-physician relationship is fiduciary in nature; and second, the application of this theory to the case of informed consent. Patients' decision-making preferences vary significantly. While some seek fully autonomous decision-making, others prefer to delegate parts of their decision. Therefore, we propose an ethical fiduciary theory that allows physician and patient to jointly determine the physician's role on a spectrum from fiduciary as advisor to fiduciary as agent. Drawing on legal concepts of the fiduciary relationship and on phenomenological accounts of obligation by Lévinas and Løgstrup, our theory relies on the key attributes of trust, vulnerability and otherness. Finally, practical implications of this theory for the informed consent process are developed: we propose a preassessment of patients' risk and value profiles as well as a restructuring of the oral consent interview and the written consent materials.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
医患信托关系的伦理:以知情同意为例。
本文有两个目的:首先,提出一个伦理信义理论,该理论证实了经常被引用的断言,即医患关系本质上是信义的;第二,这一理论在知情同意案例中的应用。患者的决策偏好差异显著。虽然有些人寻求完全自主的决策,但其他人更喜欢将部分决策权委托给他人。因此,我们提出了一种伦理信义理论,允许医生和患者共同确定医生在从受托人作为顾问到受托人作为代理人的范围内的角色。借鉴信义关系的法律概念,以及l -格斯特鲁普和l -格斯特鲁普对义务的现象学解释,我们的理论依赖于信任、脆弱性和他性的关键属性。最后,该理论对知情同意过程的实际意义得到了发展:我们建议对患者的风险和价值概况进行预评估,以及对口头同意访谈和书面同意材料进行重组。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Medical Ethics
Journal of Medical Ethics 医学-医学:伦理
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
9.80%
发文量
164
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Ethics is a leading international journal that reflects the whole field of medical ethics. The journal seeks to promote ethical reflection and conduct in scientific research and medical practice. It features articles on various ethical aspects of health care relevant to health care professionals, members of clinical ethics committees, medical ethics professionals, researchers and bioscientists, policy makers and patients. Subscribers to the Journal of Medical Ethics also receive Medical Humanities journal at no extra cost. JME is the official journal of the Institute of Medical Ethics.
期刊最新文献
Professional obligations and the demandingness of acting against one's conscience. Is framing of treatment options misleading? Maybe, but not because of a lower-bound reading. Ethics of the fiduciary relationship between patient and physician: the case of informed consent. Going high and low: on pluralism and neutrality in human embryology policy-making. Sport-related concussion research agenda beyond medical science: culture, ethics, science, policy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1