Citing the serious adverse effects of long-term medication, a doctor convinces the family of a female patient for surgery. This led the patient to reluctantly consent for the surgery, though her original choice was to opt for medication. Explain the concepts of paternalism and beneficence by analysing the doctor’s action. (Answer in 150 words)

- Citing the serious adverse effects of long-term medication, a doctor convinces the family of a female patient for surgery. This led the patient to reluctantly consent for the surgery, though her original choice was to opt for medication. Explain the concepts of paternalism and beneficence by analysing the doctor’s action. (Answer in 150 words)
Introduction
The case reflects a tension between paternalism, beneficence and patient autonomy. While the doctor seeks the patient’s welfare, the manner of influencing her decision raises ethical concerns.
Body
Paternalism:
Paternalism occurs when a professional overrides or strongly influences an individual’s preferences believing it to be in that person’s best interest.
- By persuading the family and indirectly pressuring the patient towards surgery, the doctor exhibits soft paternalism.
- Since the patient initially preferred medication, her reluctant consent may not represent fully autonomous decision-making.
Beneficence:
Beneficence requires doctors to act for the patient’s welfare and prevent foreseeable harm.
- Highlighting serious long-term adverse effects of medication reflects the doctor’s duty to recommend the medically safer option.
- However, beneficence must not override informed consent and autonomy.
- The doctor should clearly explain risks, benefits and alternatives, allowing the patient to decide voluntarily.
Conclusion
Thus, the doctor’s intention may be beneficent, but ethical practice requires shared decision-making, informed consent and respect for patient autonomy, rather than coercive paternalism.