Paternalism, autonomy and reciprocity: ethical perspectives in encounters with patients in psychiatric in-patient care

BMC Medical Ethics 14 (1):49 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

BackgroundPsychiatric staff members have the power to decide the options that frame encounters with patients. Intentional as well as unintentional framing can have a crucial impact on patients’ opportunities to be heard and participate in the process. We identified three dominant ethical perspectives in the normative medical ethics literature concerning how doctors and other staff members should frame interactions in relation to patients; paternalism, autonomy and reciprocity. The aim of this study was to describe and analyse statements describing real work situations and ethical reflections made by staff members in relation to three central perspectives in medical ethics; paternalism, autonomy and reciprocity.MethodsAll staff members involved with patients in seven adult psychiatric and six child and adolescent psychiatric clinics were given the opportunity to freely describe ethical considerations in their work by keeping an ethical diary over the course of one week and 173 persons handed in their diaries. Qualitative theory-guided content analysis was used to provide a description of staff encounters with patients and in what way these encounters were consistent with, or contrary to, the three perspectives.ResultsThe majority of the statements could be attributed to the perspective of paternalism and several to autonomy. Only a few statements could be attributed to reciprocity, most of which concerned staff members acting contrary to the perspective. The result is presented as three perspectives containing eight values.•Paternalism; 1) promoting and restoring the health of the patient, 2) providing good care and 3) assuming responsibility.•Autonomy; 1) respecting the patient’s right to self-determination and information, 2) respecting the patient’s integrity and 3) protecting human rights.•Reciprocity; 1) involving patients in the planning and implementation of their care and 2) building trust between staff and patients.ConclusionsPaternalism clearly appeared to be the dominant perspective among the participants, but there was also awareness of patients’ right to autonomy. Despite a normative trend towards reciprocity in psychiatry throughout the Western world, identifying it proved difficult in this study. This should be borne in mind by clinics when considering the need for ethical education, training and supervision

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,881

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Informed consent and the psychiatric patient.A. R. Dyer & S. Bloch - 1987 - Journal of Medical Ethics 13 (1):12-16.
Medical Paternalism – Part 2.Daniel Groll - 2014 - Philosophy Compass 9 (3):194-203.
Paternalism in the Name of Autonomy.Manne Sjöstrand, Stefan Eriksson, Niklas Juth & Gert Helgesson - 2013 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 38 (6):jht049.
Paternalism and partial autonomy.O. O'Neill - 1984 - Journal of Medical Ethics 10 (4):173-178.
5. is autonomy relevant to psychiatric ethics?Eric Matthews - 2007 - In Thomas Nys, Yvonne Denier & Toon Vandevelde (eds.), Autonomy & paternalism: reflections on the theory and practice of health care. Dudley, MA: Peeters. pp. 5--129.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-12-06

Downloads
92 (#186,128)

6 months
16 (#157,055)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?