Patient Autonomy vs. Medical Values

If a patient asks a doctor to perform a procedure that is within her expertise, but that she finds unethical, should she do it? If she refuses, is she imposing her values on the patient? What if the doctor knows that such a denial will mean that the patient will find less sanitary and safe means for achieving the same goal, thus putting the patient at much greater risk? Does the doctor have an ethical obligation to ensure that the patient is kept as safe as possible, even if that means performing an otherwise unethical procedure?

There are two different but related problems to address here. The first is the balance between patient autonomy and the doctor' s own values. Which should take precedence?
The second involves the manner in which the principle of "do no harm" should be understood and applied. Is it more harmful to perform a procedure which is unnecessary and unethical, or to let the patient do it independently with greater risk of infection and death?

Source: about.com

I think a doctor should have the right to refuse any procedure really. From my own moral POV, a doctor should rather perform a procedure than letting the person do it in much less sanitary or safe ways.

The Doctor should not act in a way that violates their conscience.

I'm confused, are we talking about the patient doing the procedure herself, or asking the doctor to do a procedure the doctor doesn't want to do.

The doctor should have the right to refuse to perform the procedure but, morally at least, should advise the patient on how to reach another qualified professional that can and will perform the procedure.

Originally posted by lord xyz
I'm confused, are we talking about the patient doing the procedure herself, or asking the doctor to do a procedure the doctor doesn't want to do.

I would answer...but I'm just about to perform a kidney transplant on myself.

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
I would answer...but I'm just about to perform a kidney transplant on myself.

I hope it all goes well my friend. I'm going for a lesser thing, to take my wisdom teeth out. We can't really compare it, but if I'm allright then so should you be.

What the ****?

Originally posted by lord xyz
What the ****?

Originally posted by Storm
If a patient asks a doctor to perform a procedure that is within her expertise, but that she finds unethical, should she do it? If she refuses, is she imposing her values on the patient? What if the doctor knows that such a denial will mean that the patient will find less sanitary and safe means for achieving the same goal, thus putting the patient at much greater risk? Does the doctor have an ethical obligation to ensure that the patient is kept as safe as possible, even if that means performing an otherwise unethical procedure?

There are two different but related problems to address here. The first is the balance between patient autonomy and the doctor' s own values. Which should take precedence?
The second involves the manner in which the principle of "do no harm" should be understood and applied. Is it more harmful to perform a procedure which is unnecessary and unethical, or to let the patient do it independently with greater risk of infection and death?

Source: about.com

Great bioethics question! I don't think it interferes with patient autonomy if the doctor refuses because of values they might have, the patient can just go somewhere else if they want.

Originally posted by Deja~vu
Yes, the doctor should perform what a patient asks if they have the knowledge on how to do it. Yes, she is imposing her own values towards that patient.