ABSTRACT
Autonomy can enter debates about consent in two distinct ways. On the one hand it may be argued that for an act to constitute consent it must be autonomous; on the other that acting without consent would be wrong because doing so would fail to respect another’s autonomy. While the former takes autonomy to be a feature of acts, the latter takes it to be a feature of persons. To assess either argument more needs to be said about what it is to be “autonomous”. In order to capture the full range of cases where consent is, or could be, given, only minimal readings of this term are plausible.
