Kelley Maureen
Department of Philosophy, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama 35294-1260, USA.
J Med Philos. 2005 Apr;30(2):189-206. doi: 10.1080/03605310590926858.
The medical profession and medical ethics currently place a greater emphasis on physician responsibility than patient responsibility. This imbalance is not due to accident or a mistake but, rather is motivated by strong moral reasons. As we debate the nature and extent of patient responsibility it is important to keep in mind the reasons for giving a relatively minimal role to patient responsibility in medical ethics. It is argued that the medical profession ought to be characterized by two moral asymmetries: (1) Even if some degree of responsible behavior from patients is called for, placing the dominant emphasis on professional responsibility over patient responsibility is largely correct. The value of protecting the right to refuse treatment and arguments against paternalism block a more expansive account of patient responsibility and support a strong notion of professional responsibility. (2) Insofar as we do want to encourage an increase in patient responsibility, we have good reasons to emphasize prospective rather than retrospective notions of responsibility in clinical practice. Concerns about patient vulnerability along with the determined factors in disease leave little room for blame at the bedside. These two asymmetries generate normative limits on any positive account of patient responsibility.
当前,医学职业与医学伦理更强调医生的责任而非患者的责任。这种失衡并非偶然或失误所致,而是出于强有力的道德原因。在我们探讨患者责任的性质与范围时,务必牢记在医学伦理中赋予患者责任相对较小作用的原因。有人认为,医学职业应具有两种道德不对称性:(1)即便要求患者有一定程度的负责行为,但将主要重点置于专业责任而非患者责任在很大程度上是正确的。保护拒绝治疗权利的价值以及反对家长式作风的论据阻碍了对患者责任更广泛的阐释,并支持了强烈的专业责任观念。(2)就我们确实希望鼓励患者责任的增加而言,我们有充分理由在临床实践中强调前瞻性而非回顾性的责任观念。对患者脆弱性的担忧以及疾病中的决定性因素使得在床边几乎没有责备的余地。这两种不对称性对患者责任的任何积极阐释都产生了规范性限制。