Advertisement

Ethical Theory and Moral Practice

, Volume 21, Issue 3, pp 649–667 | Cite as

Relational Autonomy, Paternalism, and Maternalism

  • Laura Specker Sullivan
  • Fay Niker
Article

Abstract

The concept of paternalism is intricately tied to the concept of autonomy. It is commonly assumed that when paternalistic interventions are wrong, they are wrong because they impede individuals’ autonomy. Our aim in this paper is to show that the recent shift towards conceiving of autonomy relationally highlights a separate conceptual space for a nonpaternalistic kind of interpersonal intervention termed maternalism. We argue that maternalism makes a twofold contribution to the debate over the ethics of interpersonal action and decision-making. Descriptively, it captures common experiences that, while not unusual in everyday life, are largely absent from the present discussion. Normatively, it describes a type of intervention with justification conditions distinct from the standard framework of paternalism. We explicate these contributions by describing six key differences between maternalism and paternalism, and conclude by anticipating and responding to potential objections.

Keywords

Autonomy Relational autonomy Paternalism Maternalism Care ethics 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Kimberley Brownlee, Lily Lamboy, and Adam Swift, as well as audiences at Stanford’s Political Theory workshop and at the College of Charleston’s Department of Philosophy, for helpful comments on earlier versions of this paper.

References

  1. Akabayashi A, Fetters MD, Elwyn TS (1999) Family consent, communication, and advance directives for cancer disclosure: a Japanese case and discussion. J Med Ethics 25:296–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atkins K (2000) Autonomy and the subjective character of experience. J Appl Philos 17(1):71–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baier A (1986) Trust and antitrust. Ethics 96(2):231–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Begon J (2016) Recent work: paternalism. Analysis 76(3):355–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Charles C, Gafni A, Whelan T (1991) Decision-making in the physician-patient encounter: revisiting the shared treatment decision model. Soc Sci Med 49:651–661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Christman J (2004) Relational autonomy, liberal individualism and the social constitution of selves. Philos Stud 117:143–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Christman J (2014) Relational autonomy and the social dynamics of paternalism. Ethical Theory Moral Pract 17:369–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Christman J, Anderson J (2005) Introduction. In: Christman J, Anderson J (eds) Autonomy and the challenges of liberalism: new essays. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1–23Google Scholar
  9. Conly S (2013) Against autonomy: justifying coercive paternalism. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  10. Dalmiya V (2016) Caring to know: comparative care ethics, feminist epistemology, and the Mahabharata. Oxford University Press, New DelhiCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. De Marneffe P (2006) Avoiding paternalism. Philos Public Aff 34:68–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dworkin G (1988) The theory and practice of autonomy. Cambridge Univeristy Press, New York.Google Scholar
  13. Enoch D (2016) What’s wrong with paternalism: autonomy, belief and action. Proc Aristot Soc 116(1):21–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Feinberg J (1986) Harm to self. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  15. Friedman M (2003) Autonomy, gender, politics. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gaylin W, Jennings B (2003) The perversion of autonomy: coercion and constraint in a liberal society. Revised and expanded edition. Georgetown University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. Gilligan C (1986) Remapping the moral domain: new images of self in relationship. In: Heller T, Sosna M, Wellbery D (eds) Reconstructing individualism: autonomy, individuality, and the self in western thought. Stanford University Press, Stanford, pp 237–252Google Scholar
  18. Harding S (2004) Rethinking standpoint epistemology: what is ‘strong objectivity’?'. In: Alcoff L, Potter E (eds) Feminist epistemologies. Routledge, New York, pp 49-82Google Scholar
  19. Holroyd J (2009) Relational autonomy and paternalistic interventions. Res Publica 15:321–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Horn, Elizabeth (2015) Maternalism in medicine. Huffington Post Healthy Living January 30, 2015Google Scholar
  21. Justin R (1985) Maternalism: A sound concept in medicine. Indiana Med 78(2):111–112Google Scholar
  22. Katz J (1984) The silent world of doctor and patient. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MDGoogle Scholar
  23. Le Grand J, New B (2015) Government paternalism: nanny state or helpful friend? Princeton University Press, PrincetonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lindemann Nelson H, Lindemann Nelson J (1995) The patient in the family. Routledge Reflective Bioethics SeriesGoogle Scholar
  25. Little MO (1998) Care: From Theory to Orientation and Back. J Med Philos 23(2):190–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mackenzie C (2008) Relational autonomy, normative authority, and perfectionism. J Soc Philos 39(4):512–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mackenzie C, Stoljar N (eds) (2000) Relational autonomy: feminist perspectives on autonomy, agency, and the social self. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  28. Meyers D (1989) Self, society and personal choice. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Mill JS (2005) On liberty. Cosimo, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Mills C (2013) The problem of paternal motives. Utilitas 25(4):446–462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mills, Chris (2017), The choice architect’s trilemma. Res Publica (published online first on 9th August 2017.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11158-017-9363-4) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Niker F, Specker Sullivan L (2018) Trusting relationships and the ethics of interpersonal actions. Int J Philos Stud 26(2)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Noddings, Nel (2010) The maternal factor: two paths to morality. University of California Press, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
  34. Petrillo, Laura (2014) A call for maternalism in medicine. Geripal: a geriatrics and palliative care blog. October 10, 2014Google Scholar
  35. Quong J (2011) Liberalism without perfection. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  36. Rebonato R (2012) Taking liberties: a critical examination of libertarian paternalism. Palgrave Macmillan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  37. Ruddick S (1980) Maternal thinking. Fem Stud 6(2):342–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ruddick S (1989) Maternal Thinking. Beacon Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  39. Schneider C (1998) The practice of autonomy: patients, doctors, and medical decisions. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  40. Shiffrin S (2000) Paternalism, unconscionability doctrine, and accommodation. Philos Public Aff 29(3):205–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Skocpol T (1995) Protecting soldiers and mothers: the political origins of social policy in the United States. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  42. Specker Sullivan L (2016) Medical maternalism: beyond paternalism and antipaternalism. J Med Ethics 42(7):439–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Specker Sullivan L, Niker F (2017) Relational autonomy, maternalism, and the nocebo effect. Am J Bioeth 17(6):52–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Stoljar N (2011) Informed consent and relational conceptions of autonomy. J Med Philos 36(4):375–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sunstein C (2014) Why nudge? The politics of libertarian paternalism. Yale University Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  46. Talbert BM (2015) Knowing other people: a second person framework. Ratio 28:190–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tronto J (1993) Moral boundaries: a political argument for an ethics of care. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  48. Tsai G (2016) The virtue of being supportive. Pacific Philosophical QuarterlyGoogle Scholar
  49. Verkerk M (2001) The care perspective and autonomy. Med Health Care Philos 4(3):289–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wilson-Barnett J (1986) Ethical dilemmas in nursing. J Med Ethics 12(123–126):135Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for BioethicsHarvard Medical SchoolBostonUSA
  2. 2.McCoy Family Center for Ethics in SocietyStanford Law SchoolStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations