This dialogue between patient and provider surrounding the treatment is indicative of the level of autonomy the Doctor perceives Esther to have. Had the Doctor been proceeding with a patient-centered approach, he likely would have asked far more questions after Esther’s initial assessment of her well being. Instead, he simply ceased at the question of well being as though it was a formality. This indicates that Doctor Gordon had very little value for Esther’s autonomy, as he did not find a need for her accurate interpretation and reflection of her bodily and mental condition. Alternately, some previous commentary by Esther indicates that she distrusted him and refused to provide him with the information necessary for him to provide effective care. In Patrick Senuik’s article regarding informed consent and ECT, he discusses the role of the psychiatrist writing, “In particular, the main impetus for this discussion is precisely that an overly scientific attitude takes for granted that the depressed patient – the soul that is sick – is first and foremost a self” (1). This accurately depicts Doctor Gordon’s incompatibility with Esther— instead of revering Esther’s sense of self as integral to the effectivity of the treatment, Doctor Gordon places all of his trust in the divisive science surrounding ECT. Doctor Gordon’s lack of ability respect of Esther’s autonomy indicates that he values his own perception of her well being over her perception of her own well-being.
