In this chapter it is first investigated to what extent the institutional goal and basic principles of shared decision making are compatible with the aim and rules for critical discussion. Next, some techniques that doctors may use to present their own treatment preferences strategically in a shared decision making process are discussed and evaluated both from the perspective of the ideal of shared decision making and from that of critical discussion.
|Title of host publication||Argumentation and Health|
|Editors||Sara Rubinelli, Francisca Snoeck Henkemans|
|Place of Publication||Amsterdam|
|Number of pages||14|
|Publication status||Published - 24 Jul 2014|