No description available.

The aim of this study was to investigate whether the Swedish Institute of public health care uses paternalistic information in their alcohol publications. My intention has also been to examine to what extent the paternalistic information is being used. This is determined simply by how frequently paternalistic information is found in the publications.   I chose to analyse five publications that contain alcohol related information and had a clear motive. My results show that all five publications use paternalistic methods with the intention to change readers, or people in their surroundings, alcoholic behaviour. Though this is quite a small essay, I have suggested extended research of the subject – preferably of all 176 alcoholic publications presented by the Institute of public health care.

Thesis (M.S.)--Auburn University, 2007. / Abstract. Includes bibliographic references (ℓ. 62-64)

In this essay I examine the notion of moral objectivity of moral properties. Moral objectivity seems to be able to resist the arguments of subjectivists. There seem to be true moral sentences and moral facts can explain actions and occurrences in the world. Values seem best accounted for in objective terms and persons can have interests or good independently of their desires. It seems to be reasonable to think of the nature of moral value in terms of consequences. Knowledge requires truth so the objectivity of moral properties makes moral knowledge possible. Moral knowledge should be accounted for in similar terms as other kinds of knowledge. The major requirement on moral knowledge is coherence. Moral expertise is both possible and plausible and so are moral experts. Paternalism is possible because our values can conflict: autonomy can conflict with general welfare. Paternalism is making someone do what is in his own interest. This seems best thought of in terms of the consequences for his good. The justification of paternalistic interventions seems best based on the weighing of the consequences of the intervention and the decision of the agent. One thing which must be taken into this weighing is the rationality of the decision of the agent. Rationality is basically thought of as the maximization of good. Autonomy is part of everyone's good. It can conflict with the agent's general or overall welfare. But the importance of autonomy for every agent creates a presumption against paternalism. But paternalism can maximize autonomy and paternalism can be justified to secure some minimal autonomy. So paternalism and autonomy seem to be compatible.

No description available.

This thesis focuses on the issue of whether or not the government is ever justified in prohibiting the actions of an individual who is harming herself but not others. I first analyze some of the key historical figures in the paternalism debate and argue that these accounts fail to adequately meet the needs of a modern, pluralistic society. Then, I analyze and critique the nuanced, soft-paternalist strategy put forth by Joel Feinberg. Finally, I defend a version of hard paternalism, arguing that a balancing strategy that examines each action on a case-by-case basis shows all citizens equal, and adequate concern and respect.

The value of statistical life is an estimate of the monetary benefits of preventing an anonymous death. Society's willingness to pay to eliminate private health risks determines agencies' value-of-statistical-life estimates. Most estimates ignore society's willingness to pay to eliminate others' health risks. There are two possible reasons. First, altruism does not exist: Peter is not willing to pay to save Paul's life. The second possible reason is a bit more complicated. Certain economists argue that increasing benefit estimates to account for altruism involves double-counting. The purpose of this thesis is to evaluate these possibilities. Accounting for altruism, it turns out, is not double-counting if altruism is paternalistic. Furthermore, I empirically demonstrate that people are willing to pay to reduce others' health risks. Thus, the two justifications for ignoring altruism are, seemingly, unfounded, which indicates that analysts should increase the value of statistical life to account for altruism.

Respect for autonomy has become the guiding principle at the forefront of health-care decision-making. In an attempt to preserve this principle, patients can be neglected to make decisions for themselves during times when they cannot make fully capable decisions. Under certain circumstances, it is necessary to have others assist a patient in making decisions that may have a significant impact on the patient’s life and, will ultimately, respect the patient's prior expressed capable wishes and values. This thesis aims to provide arguments in favor of both respect for autonomy and medical paternalism under very specific circumstances. It provides traditional, contemporary and psychological arguments in support of respect for autonomy. Several key arguments in favor of medical paternalism are also presented on the grounds of the loss of personal identity, a social insurance policy and the abandonment of vulnerable patients. Furthermore, the difficulties involved in both accounts are also discussed with respect to the idealization of autonomy and the potential abuses involved in medical paternalism. This thesis concludes through drawing upon the notion of an authentic self as applied to this discussion, allowing for a compatible defense of these two traditionally competing theories.

Respect for autonomy has become the guiding principle at the forefront of health-care decision-making. In an attempt to preserve this principle, patients can be neglected to make decisions for themselves during times when they cannot make fully capable decisions. Under certain circumstances, it is necessary to have others assist a patient in making decisions that may have a significant impact on the patient’s life and, will ultimately, respect the patient's prior expressed capable wishes and values. This thesis aims to provide arguments in favor of both respect for autonomy and medical paternalism under very specific circumstances. It provides traditional, contemporary and psychological arguments in support of respect for autonomy. Several key arguments in favor of medical paternalism are also presented on the grounds of the loss of personal identity, a social insurance policy and the abandonment of vulnerable patients. Furthermore, the difficulties involved in both accounts are also discussed with respect to the idealization of autonomy and the potential abuses involved in medical paternalism. This thesis concludes through drawing upon the notion of an authentic self as applied to this discussion, allowing for a compatible defense of these two traditionally competing theories.

Bakgrund: Den etiska diskussionen inom folkhälsoarbetet karaktäriseras av en konflikt mellan paternalism och autonomi. Detta då folkhälsoarbetets populationsperspektiv medför att paternalism nyttjas trots att det sker på bekostnad av individers autonomi. Då respekt för autonomi är en etisk princip inom folkhälsoarbetet uppstår konflikten. Konflikten är tydlig inom interventionen rökfri arbetstid då rökförbud på arbetsplatsen antas inskränka rökande individers autonomi. Detta är ett antagande då diskussionen i hög utsträckning inte grundas i empiri. Syfte: Genom att undersöka rökande individers upplevelser av rökfri arbetstid, förstå förhållandet mellan paternalism och autonomi i folkhälsoarbete. Metod: Studien hade en kvalitativ, deduktiv ansats där empiri insamlades genom 5 semi-strukturerade intervjuer och analyserades med en direkt innehållsanalys. Resultat: Paternalism yttrades genom att deltagarna inte fick möjlighet till deltagande och inflytande i implementeringsprocessen samt genom förbud och sanktioner vilka begränsade deras valfrihet. Autonomin genom att deltagarna kände ansvar för sin och andras hälsa samt upplevde sig kunna kontrollera rökrelaterade beteenden. Slutsats: Resultaten visar att paternalism inskränkte rökande individers autonomi, vilket medförde en tvingad beteendeförändring. Detta föranledde ett ökat individuellt ansvar samtidigt som hinder som kan begränsa individens förmåga att ta ansvar inte beaktades. Dessa omständigheter tros sedermera kunna resultera i ”victim-blaming” och ökade skillnader i hälsa.