Abstract

The aim of this paper is to analyze the treatment/enhancement distinction as employed by those against using the newest biomedical technologies for purposes other than those strictly curative. First, we analyze the most common definitions related to treatment, such as health, disease or medicine, showing their limitations and problems. Secondly, we consider three different tasks usually assigned to the treatment/enhancement distinction: 1) to establish what we owe to others, 2) to establish what should be included as part of a medical insurance system and 3) to distinguish the morally permissible from the morally impermissible. We conclude that the treatment/enhancement distinction is a useful, if limited, tool for the first two tasks, but an inadequate one for the third