Limits Of Autonomy Analysis

Beginning, from the autonomy side of things, the diagnosis and treatment of either mental disorder appears to be a clear infringement upon our sufferers’ autonomy. Autonomy refers to an agent’s right to self-govern their own actions . What Autonomy entails then is that an agent has the right to choose what ends they wish to pursue and the right to choose which ends they will not pursue. What this means for our case is that one of our sufferers may have a right to deny diagnosis or treatment, as they may be free to choose that treatment and diagnosis are not ends they wish to pursue. To treat and diagnose them would be to undermine this ablity to choose, and hence undermine their right to autonomy. As it turns out, neither of our sufferers …show more content…
This comes to light when we look at the two limits of autonomy. First, Mill’s harm principle holds that we can limit ones autonomy if their act would cause harm to another . Causing harm is a natural part of our sufferers’ behavior. Our sufferers see no reason to not to break the rules of society. This rule breaking behavior makes it more likely that our sufferers would harm another agent; as they are just more likely to act in a way that would cause harm. But, just because they are more likely to cause harms, does not mean that we can take away their autonomy, as there are cases in which rule breaking behavior would not cause harm to another agent. For example, one could find themselves going beyond the speed limit on the highway, which would entail that they have broken a rule, but not be in a situation to which they could cause harm to another, as there is no one else on the highway. Clearly in this case, the rule breaking behavior has not caused anyone any harm, and so the harm principle could not intervene and stop this behavior. Thus, it’s not the case that all rule breaking behavior necessarily causes harm. What we are left with from the harm principle is that we can still undermine our sufferer’s autonomy if they are causing going to cause harm, but that’s no different from what we can normally do according to the harm principle, though we should be able to apply it a greater frequency. Still, it doesn’t appear that the harm principle overcomes the autonomy objection, as not all instances of rule breaking behavior lead to harm. Thus, the harm principle does not undermine the autonomy