Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Observational Study
. 2018 Oct 25;18(1):818.
doi: 10.1186/s12913-018-3622-8.

Relational autonomy in breast diseases care: a qualitative study of contextual and social conditions of patients' capacity for decision-making

Patti Shih  1 , Frances Rapport  2 , Anne Hogden  2 , Mia Bierbaum  2 , Jeremy Hsu  3 , John Boyages  3 , Jeffrey Braithwaite  2
Affiliations
Observational Study

Relational autonomy in breast diseases care: a qualitative study of contextual and social conditions of patients' capacity for decision-making

Patti Shih et al. BMC Health Serv Res. .

Abstract

Background: A relational approach to autonomy refers to the way in which social conditions and relationships shape a person's self-identity and capacity in decision-making. This article provides an empirical account of how treatment choices for women undergoing breast diseases care are fostered within the dynamics of their relationships with clinicians, family members, and other aspects of their social environment.

Methods: This qualitative study recruited ten women undergoing treatment at a breast programme, and eight clinicians supporting their care, in a private teaching hospital in New South Wales, Australia. Fourteen patient-clinician consultation observations and 17 semi-structured interviews were conducted. Schema analysis of interview transcripts were undertaken by a team of researchers and corroborated by observational fieldnotes.

Results: Relational identities of patients influenced the rationale for treatment decision-making. Patients drew on supportive resources from family and medical advice from clinicians to progress with treatment goals. While clinicians held much social power over patients as the medical experts, patients highlighted the need for clinicians to earn their trust through demonstrated professionalism. Information exchange created a communicative space for clinicians and patients to negotiate shared values, promoting greater patient ownership of treatment decisions. As treatment progressed, patients' personal experiences of illness and treatment became a source of self-reflection, with a transformative impact on self-confidence and assertiveness.

Conclusion: Patients' confidence and self-trust can be fostered by opportunities for communicative engagement and self-reflection over the course of treatment in breast disease, and better integration of their self-identity and social values in treatment decisions.

Keywords: Breast cancer care; Breast disease care; Patient autonomy; Person-centred care; Relational autonomy; Treatment decision-making.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study has been approved by the Macquarie University Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC 5201600446). Informed consent was obtained in writing from all study participants.

Consent for publication

Written consent for publication of de-identified data has been obtained from all research participants.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Four conditional spectrums of relational autonomy
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Hogden A. Optimizing patient autonomy in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: inclusive decision-making in multidisciplinary care. Neurodegener Dis Manag. 2014;4(1):1–3. doi: 10.2217/nmt.13.71. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sandman L, Munthe C. Shared decision-making and patient autonomy. Theor Med Bioeth. 2009;30(4):289–310. doi: 10.1007/s11017-009-9114-4. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Barry MJ, Edgman-Levitan S. Shared decision making—the pinnacle of patient-centered care. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(9):780–781. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1109283. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Falkum E, Forde R. Paternalism, patient autonomy, and moral deliberation in the physician-patient relationship: attitudes among Norwegian physicians. Soc Sci Med. 2001;52(2):239–248. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(00)00224-0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Blackler L. Compromised autonomy: when families pressure patients to change their wishes. J Hosp Palliat Nurs. 2016;18(4):184–191. doi: 10.1097/NJH.0000000000000264. - DOI

Publication types