Harmful rights-doing? The perceived problem of liberal paradigms and public health
- 30 October 2008
- journal article
- research article
- Published by BMJ in Journal of Medical Ethics
- Vol. 34 (11) , 798-801
- https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2007.024067
Abstract
The focus of this paper is public health law and ethics, and the analytic framework advanced in the report Public health: ethical issues by the Nuffield Council on Bioethics. The author criticises the perceived problems found with liberal models associated with Millian political philosophy and questions the Report’s attempt to add to such theoretical frameworks. The author suggests a stronger theoretical account that the Council could have adopted—that advanced in the works of Joseph Raz—which would have been more appropriate. Instead of seeking to justify overruling the legitimate interests of individuals in favour of society, this account holds that the interests are necessarily interwoven and thus such a conflict does not exist. It is based on an objective moral account and does not require an excessive commitment to individuals’ entitlements.This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:
- Varied and Principled Understandings of Autonomy in English Law: Justifiable Inconsistency or Blinkered Moralism?Health Care Analysis, 2007
- Liberals and Pluralists: Charles Taylor vs John GrayContemporary Political Theory, 2007
- Ethics, Prevention, and Public HealthPublished by Oxford University Press (OUP) ,2007
- Public Health EthicsPublished by Oxford University Press (OUP) ,2006
- Community: The Neglected Tradition of Public HealthPublished by Oxford University Press (OUP) ,2006
- DO NO HARM—DO PATIENTS HAVE RESPONSIBILITIES TOO?The Cambridge Law Journal, 2006
- Autonomy and Trust in BioethicsPublished by Cambridge University Press (CUP) ,2002
- Liberalism, Scepticism, and DemocracyPublished by Oxford University Press (OUP) ,1995
- Rights and Individual Well-BeingPublished by Oxford University Press (OUP) ,1995
- UNITED KINGDOMMedical Law Review, 1993