Who is best placed in medical decision-making, to decide: the patient or
the doctor? In this important new volume in the Debating Law series,
Imogen Goold argues that the law should strongly support individual
choice and autonomy. Medical decisions, she argues, are deeply personal,
with life-changing consequences, and it must be for the patient to make
them. Even in the event of those decisions ultimately harming the
patient, fully informed, autonomous decisions by the patient must be
supported by the law.
Jonathan Herring counters, arguing that placing the an overriding
emphasis on personal autonomy does not always achieve the best outcome
for the patient. He argues instead that in certain circumstances, best
interest considerations must take precedence over autonomous
decision-making. He suggests that the law does not support autonomy as
is commonly claimed, but instead takes a much more nuanced approach,
balancing the principle of autonomy against other principles and
considerations. This is a fascinating addition to this compelling series
which grapples with the most pressing issues facing lawyers today.