의료행위에 있어서 온정적 간섭주의의 정당화 물음*

Abstract

This article examines the ethical justification for medical paternalism. After defining paternalism and distinguishing between the weak and the strong versions of that concept, this article considers two common justifications for paternalism: an argument from consent and a consequentialist argument. While weak paternalism is justified significantly by these two arguments, I claim that strong paternalism cannot be justified by the consent argument and also that there are limitations with using the consequentialist argument to justify strong paternalism. I defend a limited concept of paternalism by appealing to the diminished autonomy argument. Since a patient’s autonomy is diminished by illness, physicians have a limited moral obligation to prevent or at least to minimize harm to their patients, as expressed in the Hippocratic Oath.