Abstract
The quality of clinical practice varies according to how properly "subjective judgment" of a patient will be identified. In a traditional model of medicine such as "the doctrine of informed consent", humane beings are supposed to be always rational enough to make a reasonable self-determination. This view is scrutinized here, and replaced by another one that subjective judgment is a living process composed of abundant contradictions. This led us to schematic presentations of three clinical types of interventions : voluntary treatment, involuntary treatment, and uninformed treatment. By a further consideration of the models, it was suggested that every clinical practice is composed of some portion of "self-determinations", "compulsions", and "deceptions". Any attempts to explain a treatment by only one of the three components, make treatment unreal and inhumane.
