Paul Litton University of Missouri, Columbia
Contact
  • No contact info.

Affiliations
  • Faculty, University of Missouri, Columbia
  • PhD, University of Pennsylvania, 2003.

Areas of specialization
  • None specified

Areas of interest

blank
About me
Not much to say..
My works
14 items found.
Sort by:
  1. Paul Litton (2013). Physician Participation in Executions, the Morality of Capital Punishment, and the Practical Implications of Their Relationship. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 41 (1):333-352.
    Evidence that some executed prisoners suffered excruciating pain has reinvigorated the ethical debate about physician participation in executions. In widely publicized litigation, death row inmates argue that participation of anesthesiologists in their execution is constitutionally required to minimize the risk of unnecessary suffering. For many years, commentators supported the ethical ban on physician participation reflected in codes of professional medical organizations. However, a recent wave of scholarship concurs with inmate advocates, urging the law to require or permit physician participation. Both (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Paul Litton (2012). A More Persuasive Justification for Pediatric Research. American Journal of Bioethics 12 (1):44 - 46.
    The American Journal of Bioethics, Volume 12, Issue 1, Page 44-46, January 2012.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Paul Litton (2011). The Undue Influence of Causation. American Journal of Bioethics 11 (8):19-20.
    The American Journal of Bioethics, Volume 11, Issue 8, Page 19-20, August 2011.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Paul Litton (2010). Psychopathy and Responsibility Theory. Philosophy Compass 5 (8):676-688.
    Psychopathy presents a difficult challenge to moral and criminal responsibility theorists. Persons with the disorder have an impaired capacity for empathy and other moral emotions, and fail to feel the force of moral considerations. They have some rational impairments, but they reason adequately to manipulate, con, and exploit their victims, and otherwise to engage successfully in antisocial behavior. Is it appropriate to hold them morally responsible for their wrongdoing? Should the law hold psychopaths criminally responsible? This essay discusses philosophical debates (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Paul Litton (2007). &Quot;nanoethics&Quot;? What's New? Hastings Center Report 37 (1):22-25.
    The nanotechnology hype, engendering both fanatical optimism and apocalyptic fears, has produced calls from different commentators for "a radical change in the way we address ethical issues" and a "novel [ethical] approach to the future" that must be divorced from existing moral theories. However, a unique ethical framework devised specifically for nanotechnology is both impossible and unnecessary. The ethical issues predicted to accompany nanomedicine and nanotechnology (e.g., safety, justice, and privacy concerns) are raised by medicine, biotechnology, genetics, and other technologies, (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Paul Litton (2007). “Nanoethic”?: What's New? Hastings Center Report 37 (1):22-25.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Paul Litton (2007). The Insignificance of Choice and Wallace's Normative Approach to Responsibility. Law and Philosophy 26 (1):67-93.
  8. Paul Litton (2006). Defending the Distinction Between Research and Medical Care. American Journal of Bioethics 6 (4):63-66.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Paul Litton (2005). ADHD, Values, and the Self. American Journal of Bioethics 5 (3):65-67.
    *The opinions expressed are the views of the author and do not necessarily reflect the policy of the National Institutes of Health, the Public Health Service, or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Paul Litton (2005). The 'Abuse Excuse' in Capital Sentencing Trials: Is It Relevant to Responsibility, Punishment, or Neither? American Criminal Law Review 42 (Summer 2005):1027-72.
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Paul Litton & Franklin G. Miller (2005). A Normative Justification for Distinguishing the Ethics of Clinical Research From the Ethics of Medical Care. Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics 33 (Fall 2005):566-74.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Paul Litton & Franklin G. Miller (2005). Paul Litton and Franklin G. Miller Reply to Madeline M. Motta. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 33 (4):635-635.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Paul Litton, Non-Beneficial Pediatric Research and the Best Interests Standard: A Legal and Ethical Reconciliation.
    Federal efforts beginning in the 1990's have successfully increased pediatric research to improve medical care for all children. Since 1997, the FDA has requested 800 pediatric studies involving 45,000 children. Much of this research is "non-beneficial"; that is, it exposes pediatric subjects to risk even though these children will not benefit from participating in the research. Non-beneficial pediatric research (NBPR) seems, by definition, contrary to the best interests of pediatric subjects, which is why one state supreme court has essentially prohibited (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Paul Litton, Responsibility Status of the Psychopath: On Moral Reasoning and Rational Self-Governance.
    Responsibility theorists frequently discuss psychopathy because it challenges various accounts of the capacities required for appropriate ascriptions of moral and legal responsibility. As often described, the psychopath has the capacity to reason practically but lacks the capacity to grasp and control himself in light of moral considerations. As portrayed, then, the psychopath resides in the area of disagreement between two philosophical camps: (i) theorists who put forth the general capacity for practical reasoning or rational self-governance as sufficient for an agent (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
Is this list right?