↓ Skip to main content

The Confucian bioethics of surrogate decision making: Its communitarian roots

Overview of attention for article published in Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, August 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
The Confucian bioethics of surrogate decision making: Its communitarian roots
Published in
Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, August 2011
DOI 10.1007/s11017-011-9191-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ruiping Fan

Abstract

The family is the exemplar community of Chinese society. This essay explores how Chinese communitarian norms, expressed in thick commitments to the authority and autonomy of the family, are central to contemporary Chinese bioethics. In particular, it focuses on the issue of surrogate decision making to illustrate the Confucian family-grounded communitarian bioethics. The essay first describes the way in which the family, in Chinese bioethics, functions as a whole to provide consent for significant medical and surgical interventions when a patient has lost decision-making capacity. It is argued that the practice of not having an established order for surrogate decision makers (e.g., spouse, children, and then parents), as it is done in the United States, reflects the acknowledgment that the family as a social reality cannot be reduced to a stereotype of the appropriate order of default decision makers. This description of the family as being in authority to make surrogate decisions for an incompetent family member is enriched by an elaboration of the differences among the concepts of patient autonomy, family autonomy, and moral autonomy. The Chinese model, as well as the Confucian communitarian life of families, engages a family autonomy that is supported by a Confucian understanding of moral autonomy, rather than individual autonomy. Finally, the issue of possible conflicts between patient and family interests in relation to a patient's past wishes in the Chinese model is addressed in light of the role of the physician.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 3%
Unknown 38 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 15%
Student > Master 5 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 10 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 26%
Social Sciences 4 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 8%
Philosophy 3 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 13 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 August 2011.
All research outputs
#18,295,723
of 22,651,245 outputs
Outputs from Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics
#222
of 291 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,187
of 123,979 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics
#4
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,651,245 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 291 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 123,979 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.