Article published in:Argumentation and Health
Edited by Sara Rubinelli and Francisca Snoeck Henkemans
[Journal of Argumentation in Context 1:1] 2012
► pp. 5–18
Argumentation and informed consent in the doctor–patient relationship
Argumentation theory has much to offer our understanding of the doctor-patient relationship as it plays out in the context of seeking and obtaining consent to treatment. In order to harness the power of argumentation theory in this regard, I argue, it is necessary to take into account insights from the legal and bioethical dimensions of informed consent, and in particular to account for features of the interaction that make it psychologically complex: that there is a fundamental asymmetry of authority, power and expertise between doctor and patient; that, given the potential for coercion, it is a challenge to preserve the interactive balance presumed by the requirement of informed consent; and finally that the necessary condition that patients be ‘competent to consent’ may undermine the requirement of respecting patient autonomy. I argue argumentation theory has the resources to deal with these challenges and expand our knowledge, and appreciation, of the informed consent interaction in health care.
Keywords: argumentation theory, informed consent, doctor-patient interaction, competency to consent, autonomy, medical paternalism
Published online: 27 February 2012
Cited by other publications
Jakaza, Ernest & Marianna Visser
Labrie, Nanon & Peter J. Schulz
Pilgram, Roosmaryn & Francisca Snoeck Henkemans
Zanini, Claudia, Piercarlo Sarzi-Puttini, Fabiola Atzeni, Manuela Di Franco & Sara Rubinelli
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 09 november 2020. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.