Manipulation and Autonomy: A Defense of the Deliberative Model
Abstract
The deliberative model is a physician-patient relationship within a medical environment. Philosophers Emanuel and Emanuel explain that the deliberative model is the most beneficial because it allows for many layers from both the patient and the physician. The patient obtains the relevant medical information and has the opportunity to discuss their own values with the physician. An additional and unique feature of this model is that it also allows the physician to discuss their own (medically relevant) values and deliberate with the patient which treatment option should be chosen. Over the past few decades, patient autonomy has been the main issue of discussion when addressing concerns about the physician-patient relationship. This conversation has led to potential objections to the deliberative model. My project first considers the two main objections: (a) The model allows for manipulation and manipulation is always wrong. Building from this objection comes the second which states (b) manipulation is wrong and it is because it violates patient autonomy. After outlining the two main objections, I first look at the terms “manipulation” and “autonomy” themselves, pointing out that the objections fail to recognize the complexity of these terms. I then address the first objection. I conclude that manipulation is not always wrong and it should be evaluated through a more pluralistic framework considering the conclusion of its morality is situational. Following the first objection, I address the second objection. I conclude that no matter what approach one has to autonomy, it is not clear that manipulation always violates autonomy. This stance shows that manipulation does not automatically entail the undermining of autonomy. Finally, I conclude with the initial thesis statement, that even when the main two objections mentioned are further explained, the deliberative model still provides the most benefits to patients, as outlined by Emanuel and Emanual.
Start Time
16-4-2025 1:30 PM
End Time
16-4-2025 2:30 PM
Room Number
252
Presentation Type
Oral Presentation
Presentation Subtype
UG Orals
Presentation Category
Arts and Humanities
Faculty Mentor
Allen Coates
Manipulation and Autonomy: A Defense of the Deliberative Model
252
The deliberative model is a physician-patient relationship within a medical environment. Philosophers Emanuel and Emanuel explain that the deliberative model is the most beneficial because it allows for many layers from both the patient and the physician. The patient obtains the relevant medical information and has the opportunity to discuss their own values with the physician. An additional and unique feature of this model is that it also allows the physician to discuss their own (medically relevant) values and deliberate with the patient which treatment option should be chosen. Over the past few decades, patient autonomy has been the main issue of discussion when addressing concerns about the physician-patient relationship. This conversation has led to potential objections to the deliberative model. My project first considers the two main objections: (a) The model allows for manipulation and manipulation is always wrong. Building from this objection comes the second which states (b) manipulation is wrong and it is because it violates patient autonomy. After outlining the two main objections, I first look at the terms “manipulation” and “autonomy” themselves, pointing out that the objections fail to recognize the complexity of these terms. I then address the first objection. I conclude that manipulation is not always wrong and it should be evaluated through a more pluralistic framework considering the conclusion of its morality is situational. Following the first objection, I address the second objection. I conclude that no matter what approach one has to autonomy, it is not clear that manipulation always violates autonomy. This stance shows that manipulation does not automatically entail the undermining of autonomy. Finally, I conclude with the initial thesis statement, that even when the main two objections mentioned are further explained, the deliberative model still provides the most benefits to patients, as outlined by Emanuel and Emanual.