The article "Patients’ Responsibilities in Medical Ethics" by Zhu Fengqing from Harbin Institute of Technology explores the shift in medical ethics from a paternalistic approach to one that respects patient autonomy. However, it argues that this shift is often one-sided, focusing primarily on the ethical obligations of doctors while neglecting those of patients. The author highlights that patient autonomy is often misinterpreted as mere participation in decision-making rather than a willingness to accept the consequences of those decisions. This leads to a situation where patients are exempted from certain obligations due to their vulnerability, which the author contends does not absolve them of responsibility. The article further discusses how patients' responsibilities can be derived from general ethics, such as respect for persons and duties of citizens. Patients are expected to respect healthcare professionals and follow reasonable medical advice, especially when it aligns with their own interests. The author also examines the dynamics of the doctor-patient relationship, suggesting that patients have a duty to minimize the "captivity" of doctors, who are often in a position of helping but not fully independent. This captivity can be limited through patient compliance with advice and cooperation with doctors. Finally, the article addresses the ethical implications when patients fail to fulfill their duties, particularly in life-threatening situations. While doctors should generally respect patient autonomy, they may need to intervene if the patient's actions pose an immediate risk to their health. The conclusion emphasizes that autonomous patients have duties that are often overlooked in mainstream medical ethics, and these duties should be considered to ensure a more balanced and ethical doctor-patient relationship.The article "Patients’ Responsibilities in Medical Ethics" by Zhu Fengqing from Harbin Institute of Technology explores the shift in medical ethics from a paternalistic approach to one that respects patient autonomy. However, it argues that this shift is often one-sided, focusing primarily on the ethical obligations of doctors while neglecting those of patients. The author highlights that patient autonomy is often misinterpreted as mere participation in decision-making rather than a willingness to accept the consequences of those decisions. This leads to a situation where patients are exempted from certain obligations due to their vulnerability, which the author contends does not absolve them of responsibility. The article further discusses how patients' responsibilities can be derived from general ethics, such as respect for persons and duties of citizens. Patients are expected to respect healthcare professionals and follow reasonable medical advice, especially when it aligns with their own interests. The author also examines the dynamics of the doctor-patient relationship, suggesting that patients have a duty to minimize the "captivity" of doctors, who are often in a position of helping but not fully independent. This captivity can be limited through patient compliance with advice and cooperation with doctors. Finally, the article addresses the ethical implications when patients fail to fulfill their duties, particularly in life-threatening situations. While doctors should generally respect patient autonomy, they may need to intervene if the patient's actions pose an immediate risk to their health. The conclusion emphasizes that autonomous patients have duties that are often overlooked in mainstream medical ethics, and these duties should be considered to ensure a more balanced and ethical doctor-patient relationship.