To be autonomous is to be governed in one's actions by values, principles, or reflections that are truly one's own, to be one's own person, as opposed to being guided by external, manipulative, or alien forces. This chapter examines the concept of autonomy in western moral philosophy, beginning with a discussion of ancient philosophy to illustrate how autonomy is in many ways a modern idea. It then reviews contemporary debates about autonomy set against a backdrop of historical traditions that do (...) not always place self-government at the centre of moral value, and considers some controversies in the more recent literature on autonomy in moral philosophy. The chapter concludes with a consideration of how that notion functions in social and political thought. (shrink)

Over the course of its first seven editions, Principles of Biomedical Ethics has proved to be, globally, the most widely used, authored work in biomedical ethics. It is unique in being a book in bioethics used in numerous disciplines for purposes of instruction in bioethics. Its framework of moral principles is authoritative for many professional associations and biomedical institutions-for instruction in both clinical ethics and research ethics. It has been widely used in several disciplines for purposes of teaching in the (...) classroom, during conferences, etc. (shrink)

This collection of original essays explores the social and relational dimensions of individual autonomy. Rejecting the feminist charge that autonomy is inherently masculinist, the contributors draw on feminist critiques of autonomy to challenge and enrich contemporary philosophical debates about agency, identity, and moral responsibility. The essays analyze the complex ways in which oppression can impair an agent's capacity for autonomy, and investigate connections, neglected by standard accounts, between autonomy and other aspects of the agent, including self-conception, self-worth, memory, and the (...) imagination. (shrink)

Book reviewed in this article: Principles of Biomedical Ethics. By Tom L. Beauchamp and James F. Childress.

In this paper I examine the debate between ‘protectionists’ and ‘liberationists’ concerning the appropriate role of minors in decision-making about their health care, focusing particularly on disagreements between the two sides regarding adolescents. Protectionists advocate a more traditional, paternalistic approach in which minors have relatively little input into the healthcare decision-making process, and decisions are made for them by parents or other adults, guided by a commitment to the patient's best interests. Liberationists, on the other hand, argue in favour of (...) expanded participation by minors in treatment decisions, and decision-making authority for at least some adolescents. My examination of the debate includes discussion of liberationist shifts that have taken place in the medical community as well as in legal policy and practice, and consideration of recent research on adolescent development. In the final section of the paper, I propose a moderate position that addresses both liberationist and protectionist concerns. (shrink)

Erstmals im deutschsprachigen Raum werden in diesem repräsentativen Reader Arbeiten von Harry G. Frankfurt publiziert, dessen Überlegungen bedeutsam wurden für nicht-utilitaristische Werttheorien, für die Ethik der Fürsorge bzw. der Tugendethik, aber auch für die moderne Rationalitätstheorie. Freiheit und Determinismus sind miteinander vereinbar - diese Auffassung vertritt Frankfurt nachdrücklich. Zunächst entwickelte er ein hierarchisches Modell des Wünschens und arbeitete eine philosophische Begründung für das Argument aus, daß die Bedingung, jemand hätte anders handeln können, keine notwendige Bedingung für Freiheit und Verantwortung bildet. (...) In seinen neuesten Arbeiten entwirft er ein umfassenderes Konzept der Selbstbestimmung und der Rationalität, wobei er sein früheres Wunschmodell ersetzt durch ein erweitertes hierarchisches Modell fundamentaler Einstellungen, zu denen neben Wünschen nunmehr auch Überzeugungen und Emotionen zählen, die sich daher zugleich auf Konzeptionen unseres Charakters und unserer Integrität richten. (shrink)

IndividuelleFreiheitindividuelleAutonomieAutonomie wird allgemein als die Fähigkeit von Personen verstanden, über ihr eigenes Leben bestimmen zu können, ihr eigenes Leben zu führen anhand von Gründen, Überlegungen, Motiven, Wünschen, die ihre eigenen sind und ihnen nicht von anderen – aus persönlichen oder politischen Gründen – aufgezwungen, die aber immer in Beziehung mit anderen entwickelt werden. Deshalb begründet Autonomie VerantwortlichkeitVerantwortungFreiheit als Bedingung für Verantwortung und fordert Respekt von anderen. Autonomie ist seit der Aufklärung einer der zentralen, leitenden Begriffe sowohl in der Ethik wie (...) in der Politischen Philosophie. (shrink)

The moral discourse surrounding end-of-life (EoL) decisions is highly complex, and a comparison of Germany and Israel can highlight the impact of cultural factors. The comparison shows interesting differences in how patient’s autonomy and doctor’s duties are morally and legally related to each other with respect to the withholding and withdrawing of medical treatment in EoL situations. Taking the statements of two national expert ethics committees on EoL in Israel and Germany (and their legal outcome) as an example of this (...) discourse, we describe the similarity of their recommendations and then focus on the differences, including the balancing of ethical principles, what is identified as a problem, what social role professionals play, and the influence of history and religion. The comparison seems to show that Israel is more restrictive in relation to Germany, in contrast with previous bioethical studies in the context of the moral and legal discourse regarding the beginning of life, in which Germany was characterized as far more restrictive. We reflect on the ambivalence of the cultural reasons for this difference and its expression in various dissenting views on passive euthanasia and advance directives, and conclude with a comment on the difficulty in classifying either stance as more or less restrictive. (shrink)