Mainly limited to medical ethics, with a lot about new reproductive and genetic technologies. There is a long critical section about the media at the end.
I was intrigued by her concept from Kant of 'principled autonomy' – this did seem helpful and I can think of less awkward ways to interpret it without the language of law. She suggests that action/obligation is the best grounding for rights, which I also found helpful. What obligations for action are created when we define rights?
I couldn't really get a takeaway from the stuff about trust, and felt sometimes she was overly hostile to 'counter cultur[e]' but her realistic viewpoint, linking arguments and principles to real problems, make the discussion serious and worth thinking about. I think this is a relatively accessible philosophy book, and didn't have trouble following the arguments.
The best book I know on bioethics from a Kantian perspective, especially the first half on the meaning of autonomy in Kant and in Mill, and how both diverge from the meaning it has come to have in bioethics, so that neither can be used to support the principle of autonomy.