Whither Authenticity?

Abstract

The discipline of Bioethics, being the amalgam that it is, features myriad concepts, theories, and approaches. Singh adds another dimension to the field, with her sensitive and penetrating investigation into parents' perceptions of Ritalin use. One concept Singh uses in her analysis is that of authenticity. She applies Abbey's earlier conception of an ethics of authenticity to describe it as the “self's sense of its own uniqueness and individuality, and the desire to be true to this self” (Singh 2005). Those who lack the capacity to “lead a life of one's own” (Taylor 1991, 17) are unable to find and create their own authentic selves. Over time, this could lead to feelings of disorientation and disturbance, displacement and alienation (Vadas 1989). Applications of authenticity have become increasingly prevalent in bioethics and are utilised by both deontologists and utilitarians. The concept has been utilized in, for example, discussions of the doctor–patient relationship (Arnason 1994), treatment of persons with dementia (Holm 2001), advance directives (Vollman 2001), and enhancement technologies (Newson, forthcoming). Some of the allure of this kind of concept in bioethics is that it provides academics with a tool for a more nuanced assessment of the issue at hand, albeit with the caveat that it does tend to fall in and out of favour (Welie 1994). More specifically, employing an analysis of authenticity allows one to step back from more traditional, individualistic approaches of liberal bioethics to find new questions that require answering and which can influence debates on what we should do (Welie 1994). Singh, however, has shown that authenticity is a flexible and “inherently relational” concept, inconsistently applied by parents whose definition of authenticity shifts with what is valued in a particular context.