Privacy and autonomy: From Warren and brandeis to Roe and Cruzan

Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 21 (2):121-135 (1996)
Abstract Warren and Brandeis' tort against invasion of privacy had chiefly a social goal: to enlist the courts to reinforce the norm of civility. Years later in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), the Supreme Court announced a constitutional right of privacy that was personal in focus. Here and in subsequent rulings on abortion and the "right to die," it became apparent that Warren and Brandeis' Victorian "right to be let alone" had metamorphosed into a right to autonomy, whose amoeboid contours made prediction or even description a tricky business. But privacy is an unsatisfactory proxy for autonomy, and perhaps for this reason has dwindled in importance as a rationale in these areas. Keywords: abortion, autonomy, Charles Warren, Cruzan v. Director , Missouri Department of Health , Griswold v. Connecticut , In re Quinlan , Louis Brandeis, privacy, right to die, Roe v. Wade , Supreme Court CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us What's this?
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 5,701
External links
  • Through your library Configure

    Similar books and articles

    Analytics

    Monthly downloads

    Added to index

    2010-08-24

    Total downloads

    7 ( #133,532 of 549,120 )

    Recent downloads (6 months)

    1 ( #63,361 of 549,120 )

    How can I increase my downloads?


    My notes
    Sign in to use this feature


    Discussion
    Start a new thread
    Order:
    There  are no threads in this forum
    Nothing in this forum yet.

    Other forums