Abstract
Rapid advancement of technologies continues to revolutionize healthcare foundations and outlook. Technological progress in medicine are not only continuing to improve quality of individual life but also generally improving quality of healthcare services. As a matter of fact, the most significant change in healthcare systems was the shift from standardized, patronizing and rigid physician–patient relationship to more patient-focused, personalized and participatory practice. With this shift came increased attention to the assurance of patient’s right to autonomy. Therefore, this article aims to discuss principal problematic aspects of patient’s right to autonomy hereby the patient’s role in the context of technologies and innovation. It is argued, that one of the effective ways to ensure patient’s right to autonomy is implementation of legal instruments, such as informed consent, advance directives and Ulysses contracts. However, this article also proposes, that with a potential of new technologies and artificial intelligence, these legal instruments need to be reconsidered and transformed in more efficient and eligible model, presenting information in more individualized, appealing and convenient manner.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Total global medical technology revenue varies in different online statistics; however, most commonly used number is around 400 billion dollars in 2017. For example, see more at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/325809/worldwide-medical-technology-revenue/.
Ulysses (Latin name of Odysseys) ordered his seafarers to plug their ears with wax while swimming through sirens in order steer the ship and avoid crashing into the rocks. However, he himself did not plug his ears and asked to be tied to the ship in order to have the ability to enjoy music of the sirens and survive. Read in more detail: Bell (2015) Thwarting the Diseased Will: Ulysses Contracts, the Self and Addiction. Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry, vol. 39 (3), pp. 380–398.
References
Andreou C (2008) Making a clean break: addiction and Ulysses contracts. Bioethics 22(1):25–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8519.2007.00588.x
Appelbaum PS, Grisso T (1988) Assessing patients’ capacities to consent to treatment. N Engl J Med 319(25):1635–1638. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM198812223192504
Asveld L (2008) Mass-vaccination programmes and the value of respect for autonomy. Bioethics 22(5):245–257. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8519.2008.00630.x
Auckland C (2018) Protecting me from my directive: ensuring appropriate safeguards for advance directives in dementia. Med Law Rev 26(1):73–97. https://doi.org/10.1093/medlaw/fwx037
Backlar P (2004) Anticipatory planning for psychiatric treatment: liberty or limitation for our future life plans? J Forensic Psychol Pract 4(4):83–96. https://doi.org/10.1300/J158v04n04_06
Barilan YM (2012) Ulysses contracts and the Nocebo effect. Am J Bioethics 12(3):37–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2011.652800
Bell K (2015) Thwarting the diseased will: Ulysses contracts, the self and addiction. Cult Med Psychiatry 39(3):380–398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11013-014-9416-5
Berghmans R, van der Zanden M (2012) Choosing to limit choice: self-binding directives in Dutch Mental Health Care. Int J Law Psychiatry 35(1):11–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2011.11.001
Björnber A, Phang AY (2018) Euro health consumer index 2018 report. Euro Health Consumer Index. https://healthpowerhouse.com/media/EHCI-2018/EHCI-2018-report.pdf
Block BL, Smith AK, Sudore RL (2018) Universal advance directives—necessary but not sufficient. J Law 46:988–990. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073110518822000
Booth MG, Doherty P, Fairgrieve R, Kinsella J, Laurie G (2004) Relatives’ knowledge of decision making in intensive care. J Med Ethics 30(5):459–462. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2002.000802
Buijsen M (2010) Autonomy, human dignity, and the right to healthcare: A Dutch perspective. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 19:321–328. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180110000095
Burton E, Clayville K, Goldsmith J, Mattei N (2018) The heart of the matter: patient autonomy as a model for the wellbeing of technology users. In: The 2018 AAAI/ACM conference on AI, ethics, and society, pp 23–28. https://doi.org/10.1145/3306618.3314254
Chandler JA (2011) Obligatory technologies’ and the autonomy of patients in biomedical ethics. Griffith Law Rev. https://doi.org/10.1080/10383441.2011.10854725
Chrystal-Frances E (2003) Palliative care: a discussion of management and ethical issues. Nurs Forum 38(2):25–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6198.2006.00055.x
Dadgar M, Joshi KD (2018) The role of information and communication technology in self-management of chronic diseases: an empirical investigation through value sensitive design. J Assoc Inf Syst 19(2):86–112. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00485
De Heer G, Saugel B, Sensen B, Rübsteck C, Pinnschmidt HO, Kluge S (2017) Advance directives and powers of attorney in intensive care patients. Deutsches Arzteblatt Int 114(21):363–370. https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2017.0363
El-Haddadeh R, Weerakkody V, Osmani M, Thakker D, Kapoor KK (2019) Examining citizens’ perceived value of internet of things technologies in facilitating public sector services engagement. Gov Inf Quart 36(2):310–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2018.09.009
Evans JB (2017) Power to the people: data citizens in the age of precision medicine. Vanderbilt J Entertain Technol Law 19(2):243–65. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29118898%0A
Frunza A, Sandu A (2017) Ethical acceptability of using generic consent for secondary use of data and biological samples in medical research. Acta Bioethica 23(2):289–299. https://doi.org/10.4067/S1726-569X2017000200289
Gertz R (2008) Withdrawing from participating in a biobank - a comparative study. Eur J Health Law 15(4):381–389. https://doi.org/10.1163/157180908X338269
Gilmartin C, Arbe-Barnes EH, Diamond M, Fretwell S, McGivern E, Vlazaki M, Zhu L (2018) Varsity medical ethics debate 2018: constant health monitoring - the advance of technology into healthcare. Philos Ethics Humanit Med 13(1):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13010-018-0065-0
Gylling HA (2004) Autonomy revisited. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 13(1):41–46. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180104131083
Hevia M, Schnidrig D (2016) Terminal patients and the right to refuse medical treatment in Argentina. Health Human Rights 18(2):247–250
Huckvale K, Jason Wang C, Majeed A, Car J (2019) Digital health at fifteen: more human (more needed). BMC Med 17(1):1–5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-019-1302-0
Khin EK, Minor D, Holloway A, Pelleg A (2015) Decisional capacity in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 43(2):210–217
Klugman CM, Dunn LB, Schwartz J, Glenn Cohen I (2018) The ethics of smart pills and self-acting devices: autonomy, truth-telling, and trust at the dawn of digital medicine. Am J Bioethics 18(9):38–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2018.1498933
Levy N (2014) Forced to be free ? Increasing patient autonomy by constraining it. pp 293–300. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2011-100207
Lindberg C (2016) Patient autonomy in highly technological care environments from a caring perspective. Lund University, pp. 0–103. Retrieved from http://lup.lub.lu.se/record/2daff1db-74a7-4cb3-9241-907721ca2ee1
McKenna BG, Simpson AIF, Coverdale JH (2000) What is the role of procedural justice in civil commitment? Aust N Z J Psychiatry 34(4):671–676. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1440-1614.2000.00744.x
Menzel PT (2017) Voluntarily stopping eating and drinking: a normative comparison with refusing lifesaving treatment and advance directives. J La Med Ethics 45(4):634–646. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073110517750602
Miligan E, Jones J (2017) Rethinking autonomy and consent in healthcare ethics. Bioethics Med Ethical Leg Perspect. https://doi.org/10.5772/65765
Murgic L, Hébert PC, Sovic S, Pavlekovic G (2015) Paternalism and autonomy: views of patients and providers in a transitional (post-communist) country. BMC Med Ethics 16(65):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-015-0059-z
Orth M, Averina M, Chatzipanagiotou S, Faure G, Haushofer A, Kusec V, Machado A et al (2019) Opinion: redefining the role of the physician in laboratory medicine in the context of emerging technologies, personalised medicine and patient autonomy (‘4P Medicine ’). J Clin Pathol 72(3):191–197. https://doi.org/10.1136/jclinpath-2017-204734
Palmer BW, Harmell AL (2016) Assessment of healthcare decision-making capacity. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 31(6):530–540. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acw051
Palovičová Z (2017) Human rights: autonomy? interest or specific needs?. Zeszyty Naukowe. Organizacja i Zarządzanie/Politechnika Śląska 110:159–67. https://doi.org/10.29119/1641-3466.2017.110.16.
Parmar SS, Parmar S (2018) Expediting a changing attitude: technology in medicine. Univ Tor Med J 95(2):45–47
Rake EA, van Gelder MMHJ, Grim DC, Heeren B, Engelen LJLPG, van de Belt TH (2017) Personalized consent flow in contemporary data sharing for medical research: a viewpoint. Biomed Res Int 2017:1–4. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/7147212
Roscam Abbing HDC (2010) Patients’ rights in a technology and market driver-Europe. Eur J Health Law 17:11–22. https://doi.org/10.1163/157180909X12604572349566
Rosenson MK, Kasten AM (1991) Another view of autonomy: arranging for consent in advance. Schizophr Bull 17(1):1–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/17.1.1
Rubeis G, Schochow M, Steger F (2018) Patient autonomy and quality of care in telehealthcare. Sci Eng Ethics 24(1):93–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9885-3
Saks ER (2004) Refusing care: forced treatment and the use of psychiatric advance directives. J Forensic Psychol Pract 4(4):35–50. https://doi.org/10.1300/J158v04n04
Spence OM, Uba RO, Shin S, Doshi P (2018) Patient consent to publication and data sharing in industry and NIH-funded clinical trials. Trials 19(1):1–6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-2651-2
Sudore RL, Lum HD, You JJ, Laura C, Meier DE, Pantilat SZ, Matlock DD, Rietjens JAC, Korfage IJ, Ritchie CS (2017) Defining advance care planning for adults: a consensus definition from a multidisciplinary delphi panel. J Pain Symptom Manag 53(5):821–832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2016.12.331.Defining
Taylor HE, Bramley DEP (2012) An analysis of the readability of patient information and consent forms used in research studies in anaesthesia in Australia and New Zealand. Anaesth Intensive Care 40(6):995–98. https://ovidsp.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&PAGE=reference&D=emed11&NEWS=N&AN=23194208
Thimbleby H (2013) Technology and the future of healthcare. J Public Health Res 2(28):160–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/0039-6257(81)90081-3
Topaz M, Bar-Bachar O, Admi H, Denekamp Y, Zimlichman E (2019) Patient-centered care via health information technology: a qualitative study with experts from Israel and the U.S. Inform Health Soc Care 00(00):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/17538157.2019.1582055
Vallga S (2011) Appeals to autonomy and obedience: continuity and change in governing technologies in Danish and Swedish health promotion. Med Hist 55(1):27–40. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0025727300006037
Walker T (2012) Ulysses contracts in medicine. Law Philos 31(1):77–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10982-011-9116-z
Watson J, Voss H, Bloomer MJ (2019) Placing the preferences of people with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities at the center of end-of-life decision making through storytelling. Res Pract Pers Severe Disabil 44(4):267–279. https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796919879701
Wein S (2006) Autonomy, paternalism, and the doctor’s duty of care. Palliat Support Care 4:331–332. https://doi.org/10.10170/S1478951506060524
Wilcken B (2003) Ethical issues in newborn screening and the impact of new technologies. Eur J Pediatr 162:S62–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00431-003-1355-z
Van Willigenburg T (2005) Protecting autonomy as authenticity using Ulysses contracts. J Med Philos 30(4):395–409. https://doi.org/10.1080/03605310591008595
Willmott L (2009) Advance directives refusing treatment as an expression of autonomy: do the courts practise what they preach? Common Law World Rev 38:295–341. https://doi.org/10.1350/clwr.2009.38.4.0198
Žaliauskaitė M (2015) Mental health advance directives: could this type of contract exist under today’s law in Lithuania?. Vytautas Magnus University. https://vb.vdu.lt/object/elaba:8768771/
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Writing dissertation on “The concept of advance will in private law: balancing between public and private interests”.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Žaliauskaitė, M. Role of ruler or intruder? Patient’s right to autonomy in the age of innovation and technologies. AI & Soc 36, 573–583 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-020-01034-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-020-01034-7