Implicit in the question is that we even understand what the right treatment should be. Once upon a time, doctors would have enthusiastically recommended loboto

Implicit in the question is that we even understand what the right treatment should be. Once upon a time, doctors would have enthusiastically recommended lobotomies. Would we have nodded along? I think the ethical conundrum lessens if there actually is a clear, proven, effective treatment. We often make decisions on behalf of people who aren’t able to make the right choice for themselves, and I don’t think a pathological commitment to individual liberty should constrain us in cases where there is the possibility of dramatically improving someone’s wellbeing.