2018
DOI: 10.1007/s10991-018-9211-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reconciling Autonomy and Beneficence in Treatment Decision-Making for Companion Animal Patients

Abstract: This article explores how the concept of consent to medical treatment applies in the veterinary context, and aims to evaluate normative justifications for owner consent to treatment of animal patients. We trace the evolution of the test for valid consent in human health decision-making, against a backdrop of increased recognition of the importance of patient rights and a gradual judicial espousal of a doctrine of informed consent grounded in a particular understanding of autonomy. We argue that, notwithstandin… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
21
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 53 publications
1
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A similar trend away from paternalism has been discussed in the veterinary medicine (Gray et al . , Kogan et al . ).…”
Section: Diagnosis In Veterinary Medical Practicementioning
confidence: 95%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…A similar trend away from paternalism has been discussed in the veterinary medicine (Gray et al . , Kogan et al . ).…”
Section: Diagnosis In Veterinary Medical Practicementioning
confidence: 95%
“…, Gray et al . ), the underlying ethical principle in the two clinical domains is different:
Whilst medical consent protects a patient's rights to make autonomous decisions concerning their own body, veterinary informed consent aims to protect an owner's right to make autonomous decisions concerning their legal property (Ashall et al . ).
…”
Section: Diagnosis In Veterinary Medical Practicementioning
confidence: 99%
“…This matrix provides a format to consider the impact of different decisions on various stakeholders, thus approximating scope, and examines three areas of ethical concern: the impact on the stakeholders' wellbeing, including health and welfare (utilitarian perspective); autonomy, including freedom and choice (deontological perspective); and whether the decision would be seen as just and fair to them (virtue ethics perspective). As has been discussed elsewhere by both authors [49,50], the issue of using 'autonomy' as a prima facie principle in the context of animals is problematic, not least given the anthropocentric weight that tips the scales in favour of human benefit when discussing the moral value and utility of animals, a point acknowledged by the Food Ethics Council. Such inconsistency between the moral value of humans and animals is reflected in statute legislation, as previously discussed.…”
Section: A Practical Approach To a 'Best Interests' Calculation For Amentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, we would caution against this direct comparison. As argued by scholars working on informed consent , Gray et al 2018, the underlying ethical principle in the two clinical domains is different:…”
Section: Diagnosis and Lay Contestationmentioning
confidence: 99%