Addiction, Autonomy, and Informed Consent: On and off the Garden Path

22Citations
Citations of this article
53Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Your institution provides access to this article.

Abstract

Several ethicists have argued that research trials and treatment programs that involve the provision of drugs to addicts are prima facie unethical, because addicts can't refuse the offer of drugs and therefore can't give informed consent to participation. In response, several people have pointed out that addiction does not cause a compulsion to use drugs. However, since we know that addiction impairs autonomy, this response is inadequate. In this paper, I advance a stronger defense of the capacity of addicts to participate in the programs envisaged. I argue that it is only in certain circumstances that addicts find themselves choosing in ways that conflict with their genuine preferences. Research and treatment programs have none of the features that characterize choices in these autonomy-undermining circumstances, and there is therefore no reason to think that addicts lack the capacity to give informed consent to these programs.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Levy, N. (2016). Addiction, Autonomy, and Informed Consent: On and off the Garden Path. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy (United Kingdom), 41(1), 56–73. https://doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhv033

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free