Common among all patients was a sense of ambivalence towards their disorder , treatment , and recovery . Despite understanding the importance and benefits of treatment , many participants did not feel that this was something they wanted ( Tan et al ., 2003a , p . 703 ). For example , when asked whether receiving treatment or not receiving treatment was the better option , one patient responded that receiving treatment would be the better option , but that they were ‘ most likely to want nothing [ in terms of treatment ]’ ( Tan et al ., 2003a , p . 704 ). The evidence presented here demonstrates that capacity to consent to treatment is often lacking or significantly compromised in patients with anorexia in ways that are not captured by the traditional account of capacity . Considering this , I propose that the traditional account of capacity should be supplemented by an evaluative element that considers the role and influence of organic impairments and pathological values ( values that ‘ can be clearly determined to arise from a mental disorder ’) ( Tan et al ., 2006 , p . 278 ).
Under this supplemented account , many patients with anorexia do not meet the criteria for capacity relevant to making treatment decisions ( Tan et al ., 2003a , p . 702 ). Given that having capacity is a necessary requirement for the attribution of autonomy , it follows that many patients with anorexia lack the autonomy to make treatment decisions . Therefore , ethical concerns regarding coercive treatment and the infringement of patient autonomy can be resolved by maintaining that we cannot always ascribe autonomy to patients with anorexia when it comes to making treatment decisions . As such , coercive treatment does not necessarily constitute a violation of the autonomy of said patients . Nevertheless , it is important to reiterate that , in cases where patients do possess the relevant autonomy , coercive treatment methods should not be used .
SCHOOL OF THE ARTS 2021 / 2022
160