Authenticity and psychiatric disorder: does autonomy of personal preferences matter
Abstract
In healthcare ethics there is a discussion regarding whether autonomy of personal preferences, what sometimes is referred to as authenticity, is necessary for autonomous decision-making. It has been argued that patients' decisions that lack sufficient authenticity could be deemed as non-autonomous and be justifiably overruled by healthcare staff. The present paper discusses this issue in relation certain psychiatric disorders. It takes its starting point in recent qualitative studies of the experiences and thoughts of patients' with anorexia nervosa where issues related to authenticity seem particularly relevant. The paper examines different interpretations of authenticity relevant for autonomy and concludes that the concept, as it has been elaborated in recent debate, is highly problematic to use as a criterion for autonomous decision-making in healthcare.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Our review found substantial rates of major depression (47%), depressive symptoms (89%), suicidal ideation (58%), and past suicide attempts (37%), all of which can overshadow genuine autonomy with psychopathological influences.
“Consistently, our review found substantial rates of major depression (47%), depressive symptoms (89%), suicidal ideation (58%), and past suicide attempts (37%), all of which can overshadow genuine autonomy with psychopathological influences (35, 88).”
From Assisted death in eating disorders: a systematic review of cases and clinical rationales (2024) · cites this paper as [35]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 38 · Cited by 26
- Authors
- Sjöstrand, M., & Juth, N.
- Affiliations
- Karolinska Institutet (SE)
- Corresponding author
- Sjöstrand, Manne
- Venue
- Medicine Health Care and Philosophy
- Published
- 2013-09-26
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 115-122
- ISSN
- 1386-7423 (ISSN-L)
- 1572-8633
- OpenAlex
- W2114533612
- Cited by
- 26
- References
- 38
- Citations by year
- 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 1.02
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Medicine Health Care and Philosophy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
- Keywords
- authenticity, autonomy, individual preferences, mental illness, anorexia nervosa, autonomous decision-making, health care ethics, patient experience
- MeSH terms
- Mental Disorders, Compulsive Behavior, Decision Making, Ethics, Medical, Humans, Morals, Philosophy, Medical, Self-Injurious Behavior, Personal Autonomy, Ethical Analysis
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
