Patient Autonomy And Consent: A Case Study

Objection 1: The argument is invalid because patient autonomy is the ability to have control over what medical procedures are consented to and decided upon, while informed consent is define as a patient’s right to be sufficiently informed about medical procedures, so the patient is able to make intelligent decisions based on comprehensive data.
The author can respond to this: Donating the patient organs and consent is full authority to proceed upon a person’s death. However; there are a large discussion whether or not is legal to donate organ after the patient is dead. Moreover; families have the potential consent to act on behalf of the patient, regardless of the patient wishes are known. Although, allowing family to decide what to do with
the patient organ is an abuse of patient autonomy because it can result a lost opportunities for donation. Patient family can undertake the situation if the patient wishes are unknown.
Response is inadequate: because the family can undertake the situation and decide on behalf of the patient. If the patient die and did not leave any formal consent, so then they can act over the patient. Even though his wishes were different unfortunately the patient family is allow and decide and override the patient wishes. If the patient did not let know to the doctor his wishes, then the family can decide and abuse by donating his organ or not. Personal autonomy is completely disregarded, even if the patient wishes are known, many time the wishes are not followed.