Correct paper plz* Feed Back: While the paper includes a theis statement, it is hard to see how the same course of action can promote both respect for autonomy and paternalism. It is not clear why you think forcing Simpson to get the shott would be a case of weak paternalism. On either definition, giving Simpson the shot against his wishes would be an instance of strong paternalism. He is autonomous and the decision would override his autonomy, and it would be done in order to benefit him. He is not threatenining or attempting to harm himself. Suppose the doctors have a long talk with Simpson, provide him all the necesary information, and he still refuses treatment. What then? Do you think they are obligated to respect his decision or do you think paternalism would be justifiable? It's not clear from what is in the paper what you would say, but that is the sort of thing you want to make a case for in the revised version.