Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-t6st2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-17T05:35:54.000Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 3 - Balancing Autonomy and Interdependence

Ethical Considerations in Shared Decision-Making and Reproductive Rights

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 December 2025

Denise M. Dudzinski
Affiliation:
University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle
Kaarkuzhali Babu Krishnamurthy
Affiliation:
Boston Medical Center-Brighton
Paul J. Ford
Affiliation:
The Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland
Get access

Summary

The authors discuss haunting aspects resulting from a request for ethics consultation to support surrogate decision-maker authorization of long-acting reversible contraception in an individual with disabilities. The authors highlight the ethical tension between procreative freedom and equitable access to contraception, particularly noting ableism underlying each side of the argument. Bringing in prior case law, the authors favor a least-restrictive approach to contraception to best preserve the individual’s reproductive rights.

The narrative of the chapter explores haunting aspects of a patient’s inability to participate in capacity assessment due to communication challenges and generalized weakness. Through relying on prior wishes and historical context provided by the surrogate decision-maker, the ethical analysis presented by the authors demonstrates expressed concern with the surrogate decision-maker’s request for long-acting reversible contraception. As the consultation progresses to the patient’s assent to an informal arrangement of supported decision-making, each author shares their professional reflections on issues including equity, diversity and inclusion with a keen focus on ableism in the care of individuals with disabilities. While it may be legally permissible as well as ethically supportable to permit for surrogate decision-maker authorization of long-acting reversible contraception through supported decision-making, the authors grapple with whether the decision honored the patient’s values.

Information

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×