Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 46 (4):451-465 (2021)

Authors
Abstract
This article considers two competing types of conceptions of the pre-autonomous child’s right to bodily integrity. The first, which I call encroachment conceptions, holds that any physically serious bodily encroachment infringes on the child’s right to bodily integrity. The second, which I call best-interests conceptions, holds that the child’s right to bodily integrity is infringed just in case the child is subjected to a bodily encroachment that substantially deviates from what is in the child’s best interests. I argue in this article that best-interests conceptions are more plausible than encroachment conceptions. They have more attractive implications regarding the permissibility of interventions in children’s bodies that are beneficial for the child but are not medically necessary. They are better able to explain the moral distinction between cases in which an encroachment on a child’s body is needed to benefit that child and cases in which an encroachment on one child’s body is needed to benefit another. Finally, best-interests conceptions are more consonant than encroachment conceptions with our understanding of adults’ right to bodily integrity.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1093/jmp/jhab013
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 65,683
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Case Against Perfection.Michael J. Sandel - 2004 - The Atlantic (April):1–11.
Sweatshops, Choice, and Exploitation.Matt Zwolinski - 2007 - Business Ethics Quarterly 17 (4):689-727.
Rights.Leif Wenar - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

View all 9 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Bodily Integrity and Male and Female Circumcision.Wim Dekkers, Cor Hoffer & Jean-Pierre Wils - 2004 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 8 (2):179-191.
Children’s Rights, Bodily Integrity and Poverty Alleviation.Mar Cabezas & Gunter Graf - 2016 - In Helmut P. Gaisbauer, Gottfried Schweiger & Clemens Sedmak (eds.), Ethical Issues in Poverty Alleviation. Springer. pp. 57-73.
From Bodily Rights to Personal Rights.Thomas Douglas - 2020 - In Andreas von Arnauld, Kerstin von der Decken & Mart Susi (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of New Human Rights. Cambridge: pp. 378-384.
Bodily Integrity and the Sale of Human Organs.S. Wilkinson & E. Garrard - 1996 - Journal of Medical Ethics 22 (6):334-339.
Three Rationales for a Legal Right to Mental Integrity.Thomas Douglas & Lisa Forsberg - 2021 - In S. Ligthart, D. van Toor, T. Kooijmans, T. Douglas & G. Meynen (eds.), Neurolaw: Advances in Neuroscience, Justice and Security. Palgrave Macmillan.
The Right to Bodily Integrity.A. M. Viens (ed.) - forthcoming - Ashgate.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2021-07-11

Total views
10 ( #882,732 of 2,462,431 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
8 ( #88,488 of 2,462,431 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes