Abstract
Courts usually treat control over human bodies and body parts as a property issue and find that people do not have property rights in themselves. This contradicts the liberal philosophical principle that people should be able to perform any self-regarding actions that do not cause harm to others. The philosophical inconsistencies under pinning the legal treatment of body parts arguably stem from a misplaced judicial preoccupation with‘property’. A better approach would be to hold a policy inquiry into the degree of liberty a society wishes to grant its inhabitants. Only once this substantive issue has been addressed should property be raised as a possible method of implementing the policy.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
George, A. Is `Property' Necessary? On Owning the Human Body and its Parts. Res Publica 10, 15–42 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:RESP.0000018186.87396.fc
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:RESP.0000018186.87396.fc