The physician as fortune teller: a commentary on "The ethical justification for minimal paternalism

...I shall summarize my argument to this point. 1) A new technology -- medicalizing life choices -- introduces additional sources of uncertainty into the physician-patient relationship. The implications for the authority-autonomy tension of that relationship are not fully worked out, as is evidenced by differing views on professional obligations. 2) The warrants for paternalism are complex, ranging from a pragmatic response in the face of uncertainty to a proactive, highly directive determination of the patient's best interests. 3) Although some proponents of autonomy argue that it entails positive rights to intervention and information, the "strong sense" of autonomy is not the prevailing view. 4) The as yet unclear benefits of knowledge about one's genetic makeup are even less clear in the case of HD. Strong circumstantial evidence of risks of harm from disclosure of unfavorable test results have not been dispelled by early experience with use of the HD test. 5) A cautious approach in the use of HD test seems warranted, even at the cost of restricting autonomy. Legitimating that approach by reference to traditional ethical theory is a necessary element in the transfer of the new technology to the wider clinical setting. 6) While PMP [the principle of minimal paternalism] attempts to offer such an approach, some questions do not appear to have been resolved or fully addressed by this formulation.