Some Asian Value Reflections on Children's Autonomy
- PMID: 40225804
- PMCID: PMC11981994
- DOI: 10.1007/s41649-025-00358-0
Some Asian Value Reflections on Children's Autonomy
Abstract
This paper provides an ethical reflection on "children's autonomy" from the perspective of cross-cultural bioethics based on theories related to Asian values. The author supports the premise of "children's" autonomy and explores the differences between Western and non-Western cultures regarding claims of children's autonomy. By comparing the legal regulations on children's medical decisions in the USA, the UK, Japan, and Taiwan, the paper illustrates the national legal differences in children's decision-making, even under the influence of similar Asian cultural values. The author further explains, adopting Tsai's "Confucian two-dimensional personhood theory" and Markus and Kitayama's "Construal of Self" theory, that although Asian countries like Taiwan have historically been influenced by relational personhood dimension and interdependent self-construal orientation, individual autonomy and children's medical decisions are significantly affected or limited by family or parental determinism. However, under the influence of global human rights values and universal bioethical principles, the conceptions, legislations, and practices have evolved towards respecting individual rights and autonomous choices. Hereby, Tsai's two-dimensional personhood theory can balance the tension between individual autonomy and family determinism, as well as between children's autonomy and paternalism. This theoretical framework can provide a rational resolution to the long-standing cross-cultural bioethical controversy regarding individual autonomy and family determinism, and offer insights and solutions for pediatric ethics and children's medical decisions under Asian values.
Keywords: Children’s autonomy; Confucian relationships; Cultural differences; Subjectivity.
© National University of Singapore and Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2025. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict of InterestThe authors declare no competing interests
References
-
- Beauchamp, Tom L., and James F. Childress. 1994. Principles of biomedical ethics, 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press.
-
- Becker, Carl. 1997. Social ethics in East Asia. Drug Information Journal 31: 1089–1096. 10.1177/009286159703100406.
-
- Bou-Habib, Paul, and Serena Olsaretti. 2015. Autonomy and children’s well-being. In The nature of children’s well-being: Theory and practice, ed. Alexander Bagattini and Colin Macleod, 15–33. Dordrecht: Springer.
-
- Chenneville, Tiffany, Kemesha Gabbidon, Stefanie Hornschuh, and Janan Dietrich. 2021. Balancing autonomy and protection in pediatric treatment and research. Advances in Pediatrics 68: 55–69. 10.1016/j.yapd.2021.05.009. - PubMed
-
- Downie, Robert Silcock, K.C. Calman, and Ruth A.K. Schröck. 1994. Healthy respect: ethics in health care. Oxford University Press.