An Account of Personal Autonomy for People Living with Dementia.

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q1 GERONTOLOGY
Andrew Douglas Heslop Stumpf, Erin McKenzie, Avery Beavers
{"title":"An Account of Personal Autonomy for People Living with Dementia.","authors":"Andrew Douglas Heslop Stumpf, Erin McKenzie, Avery Beavers","doi":"10.1093/geront/gnaf210","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>People living with dementia see autonomy as central to their well-being, and loss of autonomy is one of the things people diagnosed with dementia fear most. Effective support of autonomy requires us to understand carefully what autonomy is, and to structure care plans and health policy in accordance with that understanding. Many recent social scientific studies of autonomy in people with dementia do not carefully operationalize the term \"autonomy.\" This is problematic because autonomy is a highly ambiguous term that points to a complex reality. We distill from the relevant philosophical and empirical literatures a conceptually clear and empirically informed account that is relevant to the experience of people living with dementia.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>We present a general account of the concept of personal autonomy, drawing on existing philosophical literature. We then test the relevance of this account via a scoping review of empirical research reporting on the experience of personal autonomy in persons living with dementia.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>With the assumption that adequate relational supports are in place, all aspects of our philosophically informed account of personal autonomy (decisional autonomy, authenticity and executional autonomy) are compatible with the experience of persons living with dementia.</p><p><strong>Discussion and implications: </strong>With adequate relational support, personal autonomy remains an achievable goal even in contexts of moderate to severe dementia. A conception of personal autonomy that is both theoretically and empirically informed can help guide efforts to study and support personal autonomy in persons living with dementia.</p>","PeriodicalId":51347,"journal":{"name":"Gerontologist","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gerontologist","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnaf210","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: People living with dementia see autonomy as central to their well-being, and loss of autonomy is one of the things people diagnosed with dementia fear most. Effective support of autonomy requires us to understand carefully what autonomy is, and to structure care plans and health policy in accordance with that understanding. Many recent social scientific studies of autonomy in people with dementia do not carefully operationalize the term "autonomy." This is problematic because autonomy is a highly ambiguous term that points to a complex reality. We distill from the relevant philosophical and empirical literatures a conceptually clear and empirically informed account that is relevant to the experience of people living with dementia.

Research design and methods: We present a general account of the concept of personal autonomy, drawing on existing philosophical literature. We then test the relevance of this account via a scoping review of empirical research reporting on the experience of personal autonomy in persons living with dementia.

Results: With the assumption that adequate relational supports are in place, all aspects of our philosophically informed account of personal autonomy (decisional autonomy, authenticity and executional autonomy) are compatible with the experience of persons living with dementia.

Discussion and implications: With adequate relational support, personal autonomy remains an achievable goal even in contexts of moderate to severe dementia. A conception of personal autonomy that is both theoretically and empirically informed can help guide efforts to study and support personal autonomy in persons living with dementia.

老年痴呆症患者的个人自主权。
背景和目的:痴呆症患者认为自主对他们的幸福至关重要,而失去自主是痴呆症患者最担心的事情之一。对自主权的有效支持要求我们仔细理解自主权是什么,并根据这种理解构建护理计划和健康政策。最近许多关于痴呆症患者自主性的社会科学研究并没有仔细地操作“自主性”这个术语。这是有问题的,因为自治是一个高度模糊的术语,指向一个复杂的现实。我们从相关的哲学和经验文献中提炼出一个概念清晰和经验丰富的账户,这与痴呆症患者的经历有关。研究设计和方法:我们根据现有的哲学文献,对个人自治的概念进行了概述。然后,我们通过对痴呆症患者个人自主权经验的实证研究报告的范围审查来测试这一账户的相关性。结果:假设有足够的关系支持,我们对个人自主(决策自主、真实性和执行自主)的哲学解释的所有方面都与痴呆症患者的经历相一致。讨论和意义:有了足够的关系支持,即使在中度到重度痴呆的情况下,个人自主仍然是一个可以实现的目标。从理论上和经验上了解个人自主的概念,可以帮助指导研究和支持痴呆症患者的个人自主。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Gerontologist
Gerontologist GERONTOLOGY-
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
8.80%
发文量
171
期刊介绍: The Gerontologist, published since 1961, is a bimonthly journal of The Gerontological Society of America that provides a multidisciplinary perspective on human aging by publishing research and analysis on applied social issues. It informs the broad community of disciplines and professions involved in understanding the aging process and providing care to older people. Articles should include a conceptual framework and testable hypotheses. Implications for policy or practice should be highlighted. The Gerontologist publishes quantitative and qualitative research and encourages manuscript submissions of various types including: research articles, intervention research, review articles, measurement articles, forums, and brief reports. Book and media reviews, International Spotlights, and award-winning lectures are commissioned by the editors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信