Home
Explore
Exams
Login
Get started
Home
Social Studies
Philosophy
Chapter 3 - Paternalism & Patient Autonomy
0.0
(0)
Rate it
Studied by 1 person
Call Kai
Learn
Practice Test
Spaced Repetition
Match
Flashcards
Knowt Play
Card Sorting
1/11
Earn XP
Description and Tags
Philosophy
12 Terms
View all (12)
Star these 12
1
New cards
autonomy
a person’s rational capacity for self-governance or self-determination
\-@@__**can benefit the person or not**__@@, it is their choice
2
New cards
autonomy principle
autonomous persons should be allowed to exercise their capacity for self-determination
3
New cards
examples of taking away someone’s autonomy
restraining someone
purposefully misinforming
coercion
persuasion with the use of false info
4
New cards
paternalism
==__**overriding**__== a persons actions or decision making ==__**for their own good**__==
5
New cards
weak paternalism
paternalism directed at people who cannot act autonomously or whose autonomy is lowered greatly
ex: dangerous to self, extremely depressed, addicted, mentally handicapped
6
New cards
strong paternalism
paternalism that overrides the actions or choices even though they are autonomous
\-usually involving legal
\-benefits have to outweigh the infringement for this paternalism to be okay
7
New cards
refusal of treatment
patients choose not to be taken care of by healthcare workers despite it being recommended in their care plan
8
New cards
1944 landmark Supreme Court case decision
parents can become martyrs but not force their children to be martyrs themselves
9
New cards
advance directive
legal document that speaks for you if you are incapacitated
\-living document that can be adjusted to give your considerations as to your treatments
ex: DNR orders
10
New cards
medical futility
alleged pointlessness or ineffectiveness of administering treatment
ex: doctor claims treatment won’t work but the patient demands it anyways
11
New cards
futile treatment
specified physiological treatment
12
New cards
1986: Bouvia vs California Court of Appeals decision
court ruled that competent adults have a guaranteed right whether to submit to medical treatments