Sometimes, not always, not never: a response to Pickard and Pearce

Journal of Medical Ethics 44 (3):209-210 (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper provides a response to Hanna Pickard and Stephen Pearce’s paper ‘Balancing costs and benefits: a clinical perspective does not support a harm minimisation approach for self-injury outside of community settings.’ This paper responded to my article ‘Should healthcare professionals sometimes allow harm? The case of self-injury.’ There is much in the paper that I would agree with, but I feel it is important to respond to a number of the criticisms of my paper in order to clarify my position and to facilitate ongoing debate in relation to this important issue.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,628

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Responsibility without Blame: Philosophical Reflections on Clinical Practice.Hanna Pickard - 2013 - In Bill Fulford, Martin Davies, Richard Gipps, George Graham, John Sadler, Giovanni Stanghellini & Tim Thornton (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy and Psychiatry. Oxford University Press.
V. Emotions and the Problem of Other Minds.Hanna Pickard - 2003 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 52:87-103.
Response to Datta, Frauley and Pearce.Mervyn Hartwig - 2010 - Journal of Critical Realism 9 (2):248-254.
Safer self-injury or assisted self-harm?Kerry Gutridge - 2010 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 31 (1):79-92.
Derrida and fidelity to history.Hugh Rayment-Pickard - 2002 - History of European Ideas 28 (1-2):13-20.
Choice Isn’t Simple. Reply to Pickard.Marc Lewis - 2017 - Neuroethics 10 (1):181-183.

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-02-22

Downloads
37 (#428,882)

6 months
19 (#133,897)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?