Autonomy is a pretty top tier priority for me, especially with ND children.
The only thing that I would override autonomy for would be if the consequences of not doing so would be far more distressing and invasive than being held down for a few seconds and made to swallow something disgusting or which feels unsafe. That is pretty distressing and invasive in itself, so I'd only do it if I absolutely had to.
I can't think of a situation where calpol would be necessary, so I can't see a reason to force that. Plus there are plenty of other ways to take paracetamol.
Antibiotics are a bit more dicey, because if an infection is allowed to get worse then it could mean hospital and IV antibiotics, or ultimately risk of sepsis. I have lost a family member to sepsis so I don't fuck around with infection, generally. However you often have a few days before you would get to a point where it would be getting really risky to avoid them, so no reason to immediately panic and jump to force. I would try a conversation first (I would sense check this with the doctor even if they thought I was mad and should just force the child).
I have had upfront conversations with my child before (same age - 7 and ND) about necessary dental treatment, and laid out the options, including the point where we as parents would override. I have dental phobia myself, and I noticed that I find it much easier to opt for frightening but necessary treatment when my dentist sets it out as options - we can either do this surgery, or we can leave it, but if we leave it there is a high chance of pain and losing the tooth, and over time it could spread to other teeth and threaten those too (for example). I find this MUCH easier than what previous dentists used to say which was something more like "You HAVE to have this surgery, you have no choice, otherwise all of your teeth are going to fall out!" I don't know WHY it feels better but somehow it just is! I think having it presented as this dire threat makes the surgery option feel even more frightening to a point that it can be paralysing, whereas having it presented as two possible outcomes and the dentist prefers one of them but ultimately is leaving the decision up to me makes it feel much easier to opt for the scary-but-survivable one.
I also understand though that I am an adult and my way of processing those two frightening options is not necessarily going to be the same as a child's, and sometimes they do just need an adult to take charge and make the scary decision, because they are not able to process either of the scary options. But I still think it is helpful to be clear and honest about what is happening in their body and how the medicine can help that and what would be likely to happen if it was not taken at all. And when DS needed the dental treatment, I also understood that it was one thing for him to agree that this was the way he wanted to do it sitting at home safe with me and a completely different thing actually walking into the dentist's room on the day to go under anaesthetic and he needed a lot of support with that. But I am really glad that we were able to have the conversation and take his decision into account rather than just making the decision over his head.
I also find it is helpful to look at the Ross Greene type approach where you start by meeting your child where they are at and accept that right now, today, they are unlikely to take the medicine and then deconstruct it and look at which part of that is making it hard, because you still have time to do that.
Do they find the thought of the medicine itself frightening? If they could get the effects of the medicine by me waving a wand and doing a magic spell, would they accept that or would that also be difficult, because it's medicine?
If they are fine with the idea of the medicine or actively want the effects of the medicine, would another delivery method be easier? A pill (maybe sugar-coated) that can be swallowed, or crushed and sprinkled onto ice cream? A suppository? (A 7yo might actually find the idea of a suppository incredibly funny, and it might be possible, especially if you have a local compounding pharmacy) Even the IV? I would want to avoid a hospital trip if at all possible but it is a method of delivering antibiotics if all else failed and it might be worth putting into the conversation just as part of a "This is what all of the options are that exist". If my child was really gravitating towards IV being their preferred option (I do not think most children would!) I would probably explain my other reasons to prefer to avoid hospital (other people needing the bed, hospitals are less comfortable than home, the food might be yucky, etc)
What if it's not the taste or texture, but the ability to control it themselves by going very slowly, or alternating with e.g. spoonfuls of ice cream?
Do they know about the way a food being cold makes it taste less strong? Or the interesting food science of mixing/balancing flavours (like how bitter can taste good with orange or lemon, but isn't a very nice combination with roast chicken, for example, or very sugary sweets). Sometimes trying to mask a flavour is harder than trying to balance it with something like sourness or salt.
This kind of info finding conversation is helpful, because if you're trying to solve for "My child doesn't like the taste" and the problem is actually "I'm frightened of the medicine doing something strange in my body" then you could have a medicine that tasted of strawberry Sunny Delight and it still would not solve the actual problem. And IME if you can find a solution this way, it preserves trust which can be massive especially when children have difficulty with foods. There would be a point at which I would override, but I'd absolutely be doing everything to preserve autonomy until I felt it was unavoidable.
If the conversation is hard, I loved this post: https://www.facebook.com/occuplaytional/posts/pfbid0UUxgnZwpYFNfxQyeChiZuMvJySnZxaNoQQ4cdDDd9m7qjEgtoqJvbFSNzxq16im2l