Abstract
Beauchamp and Childress’ Principles of Biomedical Ethics is built around an opposition to medical paternalism, as well as around a crucial and fatal ambiguity regarding their primary principle of autonomy (Beauchamp and Childress, 1979). On the one hand, Beauchamp and Childress invoke Kant’s views of autonomy to explain the force of their principle of autonomy. On the other hand, they regard their principle of autonomy to be directed to respecting what Kant would recognize as heteronomous choices, that is, immoral choices. Their principle of autonomy and the bioethics it endorses are framed in terms of the ethos criticized by Griffin Trotter (Chapter 3, this volume), the ethos of doing things “my very own way”, which lies at the heart of the culture that produced bioethics (Trotter, 2011). Given their endorsement of heteronomous individualism, Beauchamp and Childress mean for physicians to respect patients’ choices, even when decisions are made on the basis of inclinations, not rational decision-making. Their respect of heteronomous, autonomous choices sets their principle of autonomy at tension with the principles of beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice, which concern the non-liberty-directed best interests of the patient.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
American Medical Assoc. v. Federal Trade Commission, 638 F.2d 443 (2d Cir. 1980).
Backlund v. University of Washington (975 P.2d950) 1999.
Beauchamp, T. 1995. Paternalism. In Encyclopedia of bioethics, 2nd ed., ed. W.T. Reich, 1914–1920. New York: Macmillan.
Beauchamp, T., and J. Childress. 1979. Principles of biomedical ethics. New York: Oxford University Press.
Beauchamp, T., and J. Childress. 2009. Principles of biomedical ethics, 6th ed. New York: Oxford University Press.
Buchanan, A. 1978. Medical paternalism. Philosophy and Public Affairs 7: 370–390.
Childress, J. 1979. Paternalism and health care. In Medical responsibility: Paternalism, informed, and euthanasia, eds. W. Robison and M. Prichard, 1–14. Clifton, NJ: Humana Press.
Dworkin, G. 2005. Paternalism. In Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/paternalism/. Accessed 26 Jan 2010.
Engelhardt, H.T., Jr. 1996. The foundation of bioethics, 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press.
Engelhardt, H.T., Jr. 2002. The ordination of bioethicists as secular moral experts. Social Philosophy & Policy 19(2): 59–82.
Gert, B., and C. Culver. 1979. The justification of paternalism. In Medical responsibility: Paternalism, informed, and euthanasia, eds. W. Robison and M. Prichard, 15–28. Clifton, NJ: Humana Press.
Jonsen, A. 2003. The birth of bioethics. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kant, I. 1996a. The groundwork of the metaphysics of morals. In Practical philosophy, trans. M. Gregor, and ed. A. Wood, 37–117. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kant, I. 1996b. The critique of practical reason. In Practical philosophy, trans. M. Gregor, and ed. A. Wood, 137–272. New York: Cambridge University Press.
McCullough, L. 2011. ‘Bioethics’ ideology of anti-paternalism. In Bioethics critically reconsidered: Having second thoughts, ed. H.T. Engelhardt, Jr., 71–84. Dordrecht: Springer.
The United States of America, Appellants, v. The American Medical Association, A Corporation; The Medical Society of the District of Columbia, A Corporation; et al., 317 U.S. 519 (1943).
Trotter, G. 2011. Genesis of a totalizing ideology: Bioethics’ inner hippie. In Bioethics critically reconsidered: Having second thoughts, ed. H.T. Engelhardt, Jr., 49–69. Dordrecht: Springer.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hinkley, A.E. (2012). Two Rival Understandings of Autonomy, Paternalism, and Bioethical Principlism. In: Engelhardt, H. (eds) Bioethics Critically Reconsidered. Philosophy and Medicine(), vol 100. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2244-6_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2244-6_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-2243-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-2244-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)