Selecting Treatment Options and Choosing Between them: Delineating Patient and Professional Autonomy in Shared Decision-Making
Professional control in the selection of treatment options for patients is changing. In light of social and legal developments emphasising patient choice and autonomy, and restricting medical paternalism and judicial deference, this article examines how far patients and families can demand NHS treat...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Health care analysis 2020-03, Vol.28 (1), p.4-24 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 24 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 4 |
container_title | Health care analysis |
container_volume | 28 |
creator | Cave, Emma |
description | Professional control in the selection of treatment options for patients is changing. In light of social and legal developments emphasising patient choice and autonomy, and restricting medical paternalism and judicial deference, this article examines how far patients and families can demand NHS treatment in England and Wales. It considers situations where the patient is an adult with capacity, an adult lacking capacity and a child. In all three cases, there is judicial support for professional autonomy, but there are also inconsistencies that have potential to elevate the importance of patient and family preferences. In combination, they may be perceived by healthcare professionals as an obligation to follow patient preferences, even where doing so conflicts with other professional obligations. It is argued that a more nuanced approach to shared decision-making could help clarify the boundaries of decision-making responsibility. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10728-019-00384-8 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7045795</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2294757460</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-d9d628b185f70f4f8f468b3d86d97c3181ed0633760b79ee1ddf4df9ca9488b73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kUtv1DAUhSNERUvhD7BAltiwSWvHjh8skMpAAamolVrWlhNfz7gk9mAnoG747TidUh4LVtfS-c7xtU9VPSP4iGAsjjPBopE1JqrGmEpWywfVAWkFrSlV7GE5Y97WFLdyv3qc8zUuJsnpo2qfkpY1ktKD6sclDNBPPqzRVQIzjRAmdL6dfAwZmWDRahNjXuQ3MH0HCGjawPgKvYXBh8IvykUZi23BL1J0kHOxmwGdzFMMcbxBPqDLjUlgi6_3i1p_Ml-K90m158yQ4endPKw-n767Wn2oz87ff1ydnNU9E2yqrbK8kR2RrRPYMScd47KjVnKrRE-JJGAxp1Rw3AkFQKx1zDrVG8Wk7AQ9rF7vcrdzN4Lty7rJDHqb_GjSjY7G67-V4Dd6Hb9pgVkrVFsCXt4FpPh1hjzp0ecehsEEiHPWTaM4oaLhC_riH_Q6zqn8xy3FRCsYx4VqdlSfYs4J3P0yBOulXr2rV5d69W29WhbT8z-fcW_51WcB6A7IRQprSL_v_k_sT-JosrQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2294757460</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Selecting Treatment Options and Choosing Between them: Delineating Patient and Professional Autonomy in Shared Decision-Making</title><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Cave, Emma</creator><creatorcontrib>Cave, Emma</creatorcontrib><description>Professional control in the selection of treatment options for patients is changing. In light of social and legal developments emphasising patient choice and autonomy, and restricting medical paternalism and judicial deference, this article examines how far patients and families can demand NHS treatment in England and Wales. It considers situations where the patient is an adult with capacity, an adult lacking capacity and a child. In all three cases, there is judicial support for professional autonomy, but there are also inconsistencies that have potential to elevate the importance of patient and family preferences. In combination, they may be perceived by healthcare professionals as an obligation to follow patient preferences, even where doing so conflicts with other professional obligations. It is argued that a more nuanced approach to shared decision-making could help clarify the boundaries of decision-making responsibility.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1065-3058</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-3394</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10728-019-00384-8</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31542833</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Clinical decision making ; Decision making ; Deference ; Ethics ; Group decision making ; Health care ; Health Informatics ; Health services ; Informed consent ; Medical personnel ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Original ; Original Article ; Paternalism ; Patient control ; Philosophy of Medicine ; Professional autonomy ; Public Health ; Treatment preferences</subject><ispartof>Health care analysis, 2020-03, Vol.28 (1), p.4-24</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2019</rights><rights>Health Care Analysis is a copyright of Springer, (2019). All Rights Reserved. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-d9d628b185f70f4f8f468b3d86d97c3181ed0633760b79ee1ddf4df9ca9488b73</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-d9d628b185f70f4f8f468b3d86d97c3181ed0633760b79ee1ddf4df9ca9488b73</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-3988-9068</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10728-019-00384-8$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10728-019-00384-8$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,12844,27922,27923,30997,41486,42555,51317</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31542833$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Cave, Emma</creatorcontrib><title>Selecting Treatment Options and Choosing Between them: Delineating Patient and Professional Autonomy in Shared Decision-Making</title><title>Health care analysis</title><addtitle>Health Care Anal</addtitle><addtitle>Health Care Anal</addtitle><description>Professional control in the selection of treatment options for patients is changing. In light of social and legal developments emphasising patient choice and autonomy, and restricting medical paternalism and judicial deference, this article examines how far patients and families can demand NHS treatment in England and Wales. It considers situations where the patient is an adult with capacity, an adult lacking capacity and a child. In all three cases, there is judicial support for professional autonomy, but there are also inconsistencies that have potential to elevate the importance of patient and family preferences. In combination, they may be perceived by healthcare professionals as an obligation to follow patient preferences, even where doing so conflicts with other professional obligations. It is argued that a more nuanced approach to shared decision-making could help clarify the boundaries of decision-making responsibility.</description><subject>Clinical decision making</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Deference</subject><subject>Ethics</subject><subject>Group decision making</subject><subject>Health care</subject><subject>Health Informatics</subject><subject>Health services</subject><subject>Informed consent</subject><subject>Medical personnel</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Paternalism</subject><subject>Patient control</subject><subject>Philosophy of Medicine</subject><subject>Professional autonomy</subject><subject>Public Health</subject><subject>Treatment preferences</subject><issn>1065-3058</issn><issn>1573-3394</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kUtv1DAUhSNERUvhD7BAltiwSWvHjh8skMpAAamolVrWlhNfz7gk9mAnoG747TidUh4LVtfS-c7xtU9VPSP4iGAsjjPBopE1JqrGmEpWywfVAWkFrSlV7GE5Y97WFLdyv3qc8zUuJsnpo2qfkpY1ktKD6sclDNBPPqzRVQIzjRAmdL6dfAwZmWDRahNjXuQ3MH0HCGjawPgKvYXBh8IvykUZi23BL1J0kHOxmwGdzFMMcbxBPqDLjUlgi6_3i1p_Ml-K90m158yQ4endPKw-n767Wn2oz87ff1ydnNU9E2yqrbK8kR2RrRPYMScd47KjVnKrRE-JJGAxp1Rw3AkFQKx1zDrVG8Wk7AQ9rF7vcrdzN4Lty7rJDHqb_GjSjY7G67-V4Dd6Hb9pgVkrVFsCXt4FpPh1hjzp0ecehsEEiHPWTaM4oaLhC_riH_Q6zqn8xy3FRCsYx4VqdlSfYs4J3P0yBOulXr2rV5d69W29WhbT8z-fcW_51WcB6A7IRQprSL_v_k_sT-JosrQ</recordid><startdate>20200301</startdate><enddate>20200301</enddate><creator>Cave, Emma</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AN0</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>HEHIP</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2S</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3988-9068</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20200301</creationdate><title>Selecting Treatment Options and Choosing Between them: Delineating Patient and Professional Autonomy in Shared Decision-Making</title><author>Cave, Emma</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-d9d628b185f70f4f8f468b3d86d97c3181ed0633760b79ee1ddf4df9ca9488b73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Clinical decision making</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Deference</topic><topic>Ethics</topic><topic>Group decision making</topic><topic>Health care</topic><topic>Health Informatics</topic><topic>Health services</topic><topic>Informed consent</topic><topic>Medical personnel</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Paternalism</topic><topic>Patient control</topic><topic>Philosophy of Medicine</topic><topic>Professional autonomy</topic><topic>Public Health</topic><topic>Treatment preferences</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Cave, Emma</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>British Nursing Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Sociology Collection</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Sociology Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Health care analysis</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Cave, Emma</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Selecting Treatment Options and Choosing Between them: Delineating Patient and Professional Autonomy in Shared Decision-Making</atitle><jtitle>Health care analysis</jtitle><stitle>Health Care Anal</stitle><addtitle>Health Care Anal</addtitle><date>2020-03-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>28</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>4</spage><epage>24</epage><pages>4-24</pages><issn>1065-3058</issn><eissn>1573-3394</eissn><abstract>Professional control in the selection of treatment options for patients is changing. In light of social and legal developments emphasising patient choice and autonomy, and restricting medical paternalism and judicial deference, this article examines how far patients and families can demand NHS treatment in England and Wales. It considers situations where the patient is an adult with capacity, an adult lacking capacity and a child. In all three cases, there is judicial support for professional autonomy, but there are also inconsistencies that have potential to elevate the importance of patient and family preferences. In combination, they may be perceived by healthcare professionals as an obligation to follow patient preferences, even where doing so conflicts with other professional obligations. It is argued that a more nuanced approach to shared decision-making could help clarify the boundaries of decision-making responsibility.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>31542833</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10728-019-00384-8</doi><tpages>21</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3988-9068</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1065-3058 |
ispartof | Health care analysis, 2020-03, Vol.28 (1), p.4-24 |
issn | 1065-3058 1573-3394 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7045795 |
source | Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
subjects | Clinical decision making Decision making Deference Ethics Group decision making Health care Health Informatics Health services Informed consent Medical personnel Medicine Medicine & Public Health Original Original Article Paternalism Patient control Philosophy of Medicine Professional autonomy Public Health Treatment preferences |
title | Selecting Treatment Options and Choosing Between them: Delineating Patient and Professional Autonomy in Shared Decision-Making |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-10T06%3A16%3A04IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Selecting%20Treatment%20Options%20and%20Choosing%20Between%20them:%20Delineating%20Patient%20and%20Professional%20Autonomy%20in%20Shared%20Decision-Making&rft.jtitle=Health%20care%20analysis&rft.au=Cave,%20Emma&rft.date=2020-03-01&rft.volume=28&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=4&rft.epage=24&rft.pages=4-24&rft.issn=1065-3058&rft.eissn=1573-3394&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10728-019-00384-8&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2294757460%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2294757460&rft_id=info:pmid/31542833&rfr_iscdi=true |