I affirm todays resolution:

Resolved: Adolescents ought to have the right to make autonomous medical

choices.
I would first like to offer a pre-case observation.
Adults ought to have the right to make their autonomous medical choices
As surmised by Dr. Ryan Davis,
The epistemic argument is that individuals have special access to facts about what
medical treatments would best promote their welfare, so a system that allows
individuals the right to make their own medical choices will result in the best
outcomes. In part, this is because there is no such thing as global well-being.
Philosophers used to think well-being was reducible to some simple, empirically
detectable constituentsfor example, hedonic states. Such views maintain a few
defenders, but they are probably too simple. It might be better for you, overall, to
embark on a difficult and strenuous plan, even if you realize it will not best promote
your hedonic well-being. People make choices like this all the time, and we do not
regard them as irrational.
Because well-being is a composite value, it tends to be contingent on an
individuals aims, plans, and commitments. For this reason, the individual will
generally have better access to the content of her own well-being than other
persons.
The highest value in todays round is
The best criterion in today round is
To support by case I have 3 contentions:
Contention 1
Adolescents and adults have comparable decision-making capacities.
Isabelle M.A. French, [Dalhousie University], Defining the Role of Mature Minors in
the Medical
Research Consent Process, Thesis for Master of Laws, Dalhousie University, 2011.
Research suggests that adolescents and adults have comparable decision-making
capacity in the treatment context.
Notably, in the often-cited study by Weithorn and Campbell, children, adolescents
and adults were presented with four hypothetical treatment dilemmas. They were
then interviewed, with their responses to questions coded on the basis of
understanding, choice, reasoned outcome, and rationale. Ultimately, this study
revealed that fourteen year old adolescents did not differ from adults on any of the
dimensions (understanding, choice, reasoned outcome, and rationale) assessed.414
Although the fact that this study involved hypothetical scenarios cannot be ignored,
it is necessary to ensure its significance is not overemphasized when trying to apply

the findings to the research context given the inherent uncertainty of the research
process. Such uncertainty includes in double-blind drug trials, for example, the fact
that neither the investigator nor the participant know which investigational product
the participant will receive at the time consent is obtained or even while the study
is ongoing. Efficacy of the intervention is also unknown, which is not the case in the
treatment context. Briefly stated then, hypothetical scenarios are more akin to the
research context than they are to the treatment context.