Rawls and Religious Paternalism

Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 37 (4):373-386 (2012)
Abstract
MacDougall (2010) has argued that Rawls‘ liberal social theory suggest that parents who hold certain religious convictions can refuse blood transfusion on their children’s behalf. This paper argues that this is wrong for at least five reasons. First, MacDougall neglects the possibility that true freedom of conscience entails the right to choose one’s own religion rather than have it dictated by one’s parents. Second, he conveniently ignores the fact that children in such situations are much more likely to die than to survive without blood. Third, he relies on an ambiguous understanding of what is “rational” and treats children as mere extensions of their parents. Fourth, he neglects the fact that those in the original position would seek to protect themselves from persecution and enslavement, and thus would not allow categories of children who are killed because of their parents’ beliefs. Finally, Rawls makes it clear that we should choose for children as we would choose for ourselves in the original position, with no particular conception of the good (such as that held by JWs).
Keywords Medical ethics  Liberalism  Refusal of treatment
Categories (categorize this paper)
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: 9,360
External links
  •   Try with proxy.
  • Through your library Configure
    References found in this work BETA

    No references found.

    Citations of this work BETA
    Similar books and articles
    D. M. Shaw & J. Busch (2012). Rawls and Religious Paternalism. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 37 (4):373-386.
    David Shaw (2011). Justice and the Fetus: Rawls, Children and Abortion. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 20 (1):93-101.
    Philip Pettit (1974). A Theory of Justice? Theory and Decision 4 (3-4):311-324.
    Russell Disilvestro (2005). Human Embryos in the Original Position? Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 30 (3):285 – 304.
    Analytics

    Monthly downloads

    Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.

    Added to index

    2011-11-09

    Total downloads

    0

    Recent downloads (6 months)

    0

    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.