Conception and the concept of harm

Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 8 (2):137-158 (1983)
Abstract
In recent years, science and the courts have created new options whereby prospective parents can avoid the birth of a diseased or defective child. We can ascertain the likelihood that certain genetic diseases will be transmitted; We can detect a number of fetal abnormalities in utero ; we have legal permission to abort for any reason, including fetal abnormality. With these new options come new questions concerning our moral obligations toward our prospective offspring. An important conceptual question concerns whether such congenital diseases and defects constitute harms to the children who bear them. In this essay I shall examine the prevailing analysis of harm, the "Otherwise-Condition" approach, which denies that we can predicate harm of such abnormalities. I will show first that this analysis is inadequate even to account for certain very ordinary, clear cases of harm. It thus is suspect regardless of its stance on congenital anomalies. Second, it sets up an ill-considered connection between harm and causation – a connection which renders its harm ascriptions slippery, arbitrary. Finally, this analysis cannot be squared with certain of our deeply entrenched moral intuitions. By thus rebutting this most influential definition of harm, I will have opened the door to the possibility of ascribing harm for congenital disease and defect. Keywords: Harm, Otherwise-condition, Congenital anomaly * I would like to thank A. D. Woozley, Derek Parfit, Daniel Devereux, and the editors and reviewers of the JMP for their helpful comments on earlier drafts of this paper. CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us What's this?
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1093/jmp/8.2.137
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
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 26,641
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Harming by Conceiving: A Review of Misconceptions and a New Analysis. [REVIEW]Carson Strong - 2005 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 30 (5):491 – 516.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Identity, Harm, and the Ethics of Reproductive Technology.Janet Malek - 2006 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 31 (1):83 – 95.
Why Self-Ownership is Prescriptively Impotent.Evan Fox-Decent - 1998 - Journal of Value Inquiry 32 (4):489-506.
Harming by Conceiving: A Review of Misconceptions and a New Analysis. [REVIEW]Carson Strong - 2005 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 30 (5):491 – 516.
Mortal Harm.Steven Luper - 2007 - Philosophical Quarterly 57 (227):239–251.
Identifying Harms.Shlomit Harrosh - 2012 - Bioethics 26 (9):493-498.
The Moral Limits of the Criminal Law.Joel Feinberg - 1984 - Oxford University Press.
The Moral Status of Enabling Harm.Samuel C. Rickless - 2011 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 92 (1):66-86.
The Harm Principle.Nils Holtug - 2002 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 5 (4):357-389.

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2010-08-14

Total downloads

10 ( #427,147 of 2,158,169 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #356,322 of 2,158,169 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.

Other forums