Madam, - In the past week your newspaper has focused on two issues which raise ethical questions for medical practitioners and hospitals, and also for this society. The removal of women's reproductive organs without consent and the removal and passing on of pituitary gland tissue without consent are being presented in sections of the media as the same ethical issue, i.e. intervention without consent. I believe they are vastly different.
Consent is now seen as central to medical procedures because of an increased awareness of the value of the autonomy of the individual patient. This is a value which our society acknowledges and wishes to protect. It is not, however, the highest value in the doctor-patient relationship. Where values clash the lower value must give way to the higher value.
I believe that, unlike the removal without consent of women's reproductive organs, the removal of tissue of deceased infants or adults must give way to the higher value of benefiting the wider community. I would favour a change in the law to allow removal unless consent is specifically withheld, as is the case in France and other European countries.
The emphasis on individual autonomy and informed consent are late 20th century phenomena which, under secular laws and codes, have found expression and become part of our cultural understanding. I fear this over-emphasis on autonomy is another instance of growing "mé féinism". It takes no account of the benefit that may accrue to others. - Yours, etc.,
AÍLÍN DOYLE,
Balkill Road,
Howth,
Co Dublin.