Department of Philosophy, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, USA.
Bioethics. 2022 Nov;36(9):940-947. doi: 10.1111/bioe.13084. Epub 2022 Sep 6.
Medical students commonly learn how to administer pelvic exams by practicing on unconscious patients, often without first obtaining explicit consent from patients to do so. While 21 states currently have laws that require teaching hospitals to obtain consent from patients to participate in this educational experience, opposition from the medical community has stymied legislative progress. In this paper, I respond to the two most common reasons offered to oppose the legislation, which appeal to (1) the educational benefits of these exams or (2) protecting institutional autonomy. Kantian ideas about autonomy help to illuminate the problematic ways in which these arguments supplant the importance of women's choices over how their bodies are used while seeking medical treatment. Ultimately, neither argument offers sufficient reason to oppose laws that require explicit consent before administering training pelvic exams.
医学生通常通过在无意识的患者身上练习来学习如何进行骨盆检查，而通常在这样做之前并未首先获得患者的明确同意。尽管目前有 21 个州的法律要求教学医院获得患者同意才能参与这种教育体验，但来自医学界的反对意见阻碍了立法进展。在本文中，我对反对该立法的两个最常见理由做出回应，这些理由分别涉及 (1) 这些检查的教育益处，或 (2) 保护机构自主权。康德关于自主的思想有助于阐明这些论点以取代女性在寻求医疗时对自己身体如何使用的选择的重要性的有问题的方式。最终，这两个论点都没有充分的理由反对要求在进行培训骨盆检查之前获得明确同意的法律。
