Why Mill was for paternalism

Waithe, Mary Ellen

doi:10.1016/0160-2527(83)90009-2

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At the same time, the typical doctor-patient relationship of the age was inherently paternalistic, with doctors being presented as unequivocally right (Matthews 1986) about patient needs. This rendered patient input largely irrelevant (Waithe 1983;Charles et al 1999). Thus, the NHS of 1948 produced the 'nanny state' (Flaskerud 2014), by combining the newly paternalist state with the already inherently paternalist medical profession (Anderson and Gillam 2001).…”

Section: Empowerment or Libertarian Paternalism?mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Limits of Empowerment: How to Reframe the Role of mHealth Tools in the Healthcare Ecosystem

Morley

Floridi

2019

Sci Eng Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article highlights the limitations of the tendency to frame health-and wellbeing-related digital tools (mHealth technologies) as empowering devices, especially as they play an increasingly important role in the National Health Service (NHS) in the UK. It argues that mHealth technologies should instead be framed as digital companions. This shift from empowerment to companionship is advocated by showing the conceptual, ethical, and methodological issues challenging the narrative of empowerment, and by arguing that such challenges, as well as the risk of medical paternalism, can be overcome by focusing on the potential for mHealth tools to mediate the relationship between recipients of clinical advice and givers of clinical advice, in ways that allow for contextual flexibility in the balance between patiency and agency. The article concludes by stressing that reframing the narrative cannot be the only means for avoiding harm caused to the NHS as a healthcare system by the introduction of mHealth tools. Future discussion will be needed on the overarching role of responsible design.

show abstract

Section: Empowerment or Libertarian Paternalism?mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Limits of Empowerment: How to Reframe the Role of mHealth Tools in the Healthcare Ecosystem

Morley

Floridi

2019

Sci Eng Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Waithe21 argues that Mill would have supported paternalistic interventions, Munetz et al 11 hold that this can be extrapolated to SCT. Waithe21 writes that ‘Mill held that paternalism was permissible when the prospectively paternalised cannot be held to be morally responsible, or as Mill says, “blameworthy” for his action’(p 103). Rawls12 defends paternalistic intervention ‘to protect … against the weakness and infirmities of their reason and will in society’ (p 219).…”

Section: The Civil Liberties Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Is supervised community treatment ethically justifiable?

Dale¹

2010

J Med Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ethical viewpoints for and against the use of supervised community treatment (SCT), also known as outpatient commitment and community treatment orders, are examined. The perspectives of writers on civil liberties are considered. This paper argues that while civil liberties are an important concern SCT is ethically justifiable in the circumscribed population of 'revolving door' patients it applies to. This is on the grounds that it enables individuals to actualise their positive liberty. The issue of insight into mental illness is also considered and it is concluded that a further argument in favour of SCT comes from evidence that insight relates to neurobiological deficits. Limits to the ethical justifiability of SCT are considered with reference to individuals with substance dependency. The paper concludes that SCT is ethically permissible only in those with severe mental illness who have a history of losing capacity to consent to treatment and/or admission.

show abstract

“…In applying Mill's philosophy to justify paternalistic involuntary psychiatric treatment, it has been argued that the preconditions to a paternalistic act are that the individual in question is not responsible for their actions, the individual's incompetence is about to cause harm, ‘paternalization’ will ultimately enhance the individual's competence and/or prevent further deterioration, and paternalization takes place in the least restrictive manner. As such, Mill would have supported involuntary psychiatric treatment [50]. Involuntary psychiatric treatment is justifiable from the perspective of a variety of ethical theories [44], although as Chodoff has argued in the light of human rights abuses perpetrated under the guise of psychiatric treatment, there is a need for a ‘self critical and chastened’ paternalism [41].…”

Section: Dual Role and Involuntary Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Many Faces of the Dual-Role Dilemma in Psychiatric Ethics

Robertson

Walter

2008

Aust N Z J Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In psychiatric ethics, the dual-role dilemma refers to the tension between psychiatrists' obligations of beneficence towards their patients, and conflicting obligations to the community, third parties, other health-care workers, or the pursuit of knowledge in the field. These conflicting obligations transcend a conflict of interest in that the expectations of the psychiatrist, other than the patient's best interests, are so compelling. This tension illustrates how the discourse in psychiatric ethics is embedded in the social and cultural context of the situations encountered. It appears that as society changes in its approach to the value of liberal autonomy and the 'collective good', psychiatrists may also need to change.

show abstract

Why Mill was for paternalism

Cited by 10 publications

References 0 publications

The Limits of Empowerment: How to Reframe the Role of mHealth Tools in the Healthcare Ecosystem

The Limits of Empowerment: How to Reframe the Role of mHealth Tools in the Healthcare Ecosystem

Is supervised community treatment ethically justifiable?

Many Faces of the Dual-Role Dilemma in Psychiatric Ethics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About