Perspectives

To Inform, Recommend, and Sometimes Persuade: The Ethics of Physician Influence in Shared Decision Making

Authors: Lauris C. Kaldjian, MD, PhD

Abstract

Informed consent is broadly endorsed as a process that should facilitate shared decision making between a patient (or surrogate) and a physician (or other clinician). The goal of this collaborative process is to help patients make decisions that reflect what matters most to them, based on their guiding beliefs and values. Although there may be broad consensus that shared decision making is expected, it is not clear that physicians agree on what “shared” means. How much influence should physicians try to exert on patients, and how should it be communicated?

This content is limited to qualifying members.

Existing members, please login first

If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view purchase options.

Purchase only this article ($25)

Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.

Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)

Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.

Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)

Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.

References

1. Charles C, Whelan T, Gafni A. What do we mean by partnership in making decisions about treatment? BMJ 1999;319:780–782.
 
2. Appelbaum PS. Clinical practice. Assessment of patients’ competence to consent to treatment. N Engl J Med 2007;357:1834–1840.
 
3. Appelbaum PS, Lidz CW, Meisel A. Informed Consent: Legal Theory and Clinical Practice. New York: Oxford University Press; 1987.
 
4. Elwyn G, Frosch D, Thomson R, et al. Shared decision making: a model for clinical practice. J Gen Intern Med 2012;27:1361–1367.
 
5. Carmona C, Crutwell J, Burnham M, et al. Shared decision-making: summary of NICE guidance. BMJ 2021;373:n1430.
 
6. Jonsen AR, Siegler M, Winslade WJ. Clinical Ethics: A Practical Approach to Ethical Decisions in Clinical Medicine. 8th ed. New York: McGraw Hill; 2015.
 
7. Ariadne Labs. Serious illness conversation guide. https://www.ariadnelabs. org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/SI-CG-2017-04-21_FINAL.pdf. Revised April 2017. Accessed August 13, 2021.
 
8. Scheunemann LP, Ernecoff NC, Buddadhumaruk P, et al. Clinician-family communication About patients’ values and preferences in intensive care units. JAMA Intern Med 2019;179:676–684.
 
9. Bosslet GT, Pope TM, Rubenfeld GD, et al. An official ATS/AACN/ACCP/ ESICM/SCCM Policy Statement: responding to requests for potentially inappropriate treatments in intensive care units. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2015;191:1318–1330.
 
10. Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospital. 211 N.Y. 125, 105 N.E. 92 (New York State Court of Appeals, 1914). https://www.lexisnexis.com/ community/casebrief/p/casebrief-schloendorff-v-soc-y-of-n-y-hosp. Accessed January 14, 2022.
 
11. Pellegrino ED. The internal morality of clinical medicine: a paradigm for the ethics of the helping and healing professions. J Med Philos 2001;26: 559–579.
 
12. Gillon R. Defending the four principles approach as a good basis for good medical practice and therefore for good medical ethics. J Med Ethics 2015; 41:111–116.
 
13. Mackenzie C. Relational autonomy, normative authority and perfectionism. J Soc Philos 2008;39:512–533.
 
14. Mayfield JJ, McKee KY, Zier LS, et al. Hearts and minds: an exercise in clinical reasoning. J Gen Intern Med 2021;36:1778–1783.
 
15. Alfandre D. Reconsidering against medical advice discharges: embracing patient-centeredness to promote high quality care and a renewed research agenda. J Gen Intern Med 2013;28:1657–1662.
 
16. Kaldjian LC. Concepts of health, ethics, and communication in shared decision making. Commun Med 2017;14:83–95.