1887
Controversies, Communication and the Body
  • ISSN 0929-0907
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9943
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

This paper will focus on two controversial cases relating to the [mis]use of the notion of autonomy in situations of life and death. While in one case the patient’s will to die was not respected, in the other there was no attempt to save the life of the individual. I have chosen to put these two specific cases in parallel for the fact that in both instances the presence of some kind of mental impairment is not given at all. Yet, in both situations there is substantial reference to some type of temporary competence -as this is the key element that, allegedly, should function as decisive to assess the moral and legal justification behind the decision to enforce -or not- medical treatment upon the protagonists of these two very sad stories. Following on from the objective of this paper thus, the contraposition of these two cases will provide us with a vivid image of the practical implications of using the notion of autonomy (here presented under the form of a more psychiatric-oriented term: competence) in an inconsistent manner within the Western world (US and EU). Raising many doubts over its appropriateness.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/pc.23.3.13gar
2017-07-10
2019-10-17
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/pc.23.3.13gar
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Autonomy , Biopolitics , Competence , Enforced Medical Treatment and Paternalism
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error