If they can consent, why can’t they refuse?
in Ethical and legal debates in Irish healthcare
Abstract only
Log-in for full text

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

manchesterhive requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals - to see content that you/your institution should have access to, please log in through your library system or with your personal username and password.

If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/extracts and download selected front and end matter. 

Institutions can purchase access to individual titles; please contact manchesterhive@manchester.ac.uk for pricing options.

ACCESS TOKENS

If you have an access token for this content, you can redeem this via the link below:

Redeem token

This chapter considers how inconsistencies can be resolved in the context of refusal of medical treatment by young people over sixteen by looking at the roles consent plays in medicine. In some cases the question of whether that refusal should be respected is purely academic – for practical reasons the treatment cannot be given. But where treatment could be provided in the light of such a refusal it is unclear whether it is permissible to do so. This is because it seems inconsistent both to say that a patient can consent to treatment but not refuse it, and to say that we ought to seek consent even where a refusal to provide it may be overridden. The chapter argues that there is a relatively straightforward argument to support the idea that young people can consent to, but not effectively refuse, medical treatment. What will turn out to require further explanation, at least on standard ways of approaching medical ethics, is the idea that it is always morally wrong to give an adult treatment that she refuses.

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 72 42 0
Full Text Views 22 3 0
PDF Downloads 15 1 0