부산대학교 도서관

Some people with cognitive disabilities are perceived to have compromised autonomy and thus unable to consent to research participation. Individuals without cognitive disabilities are assumed to have the capacity to consent, despite falling prey to errors such as the therapeutic misconception, unrealistic optimism, or a lack of appreciation. The distinction between conceptual errors made by presumably “typical” individuals and those made by individuals with cognitive impairments may not be so different, and differences that do exist not so profound. Best practices call for a “meeting in the middle”—a recognition that “typical” individuals are not nearly as autonomous as we first think, and that the autonomy of “atypical” individuals is not as compromised as first appears. Two objections to this conclusion are addressed: exploitation, and a history of research abuses. Respecting persons with cognitive impairments means recognizing that their imperfect autonomy is not dissimilar from the imperfect autonomy of others.