I need help creating a journal entry for my Bioethics class. The subject is Pate

Question

I need help creating a journal entry for my Bioethics class. The subject is Paternalism and Patient Autonomy. The assignment is to form a question about the subject and 1/2 pg to a page using critical reflection going in depth and considering their implications. Thoughtfully interacting with my ideas and using moral ethics to explain sufficient reasoning and arguments I need help creating a journal entry for my Bioethics class. The subject is Paternalism and Patient Autonomy. The assignment is to form a question about the subject and 1/2 pg to a page using critical reflection going in depth and considering their implications. Thoughtfully interacting with my ideas and using moral ethics to explain sufficient reasoning and arguments The assignment is to form a question about the subject and 1/2 pg to a page using critical reflection going in depth and considering their implications. Thoughtfully interacting with my ideas and using moral ethics to explain sufficient reasoning and arguments

Explanation / Answer

THERE HAS BEEN A SURGE OFinterest in public health ethics in recent years. Whereas medicine focuses on individual health, public health is concerned with the health of the entire population. Thus, in contrast to the primary fiduciary duty to the individual patient found in clinical medicine, public health ethics is founded on a societal responsibility to protect and promote the health of the population as a whole.1 On the basis of this distinction, many commentators have suggested that one major issue that distinguishes public health ethics from clinical ethics is identifying when paternalistic interventions that override individual autonomy are justified.

***

UNDUE ATTENTION TO JUSTIFYING PATERNALISM

Many authors have claimed that the central moral concern of public health ethics is articulating sound reasons for overriding individual freedom for the sake of promoting public health. In the landmark 1974 report on health promotion, Lalonde laid the foundation for this focal concern:

The ultimate philosophical issue . . . is whether and to what extent the government can get into the business of modifying human behavior, even if it does so to improve health.

In the many efforts since that time to justify this proposition, almost everyone points to the signal contribution of the 1905 Supreme Court ruling Jacobson v Massachusetts, which many consider the cornerstone of public health ethics.

The liberty secured by the Constitution of the United States to every person within its jurisdiction does not impart an absolute right in each person to be, at all times and in all circumstances, wholly freed from restraint. There are manifold restraints to which every person is necessarily subject for the common good.

***

THE LIMITS OF PATERNALISM

Although public health proudly points to the Jacobson ruling as providing authoritative support for its right to restrict individual autonomy to protect and promote public health, there is a morally significant difference between controlling disease agents and controlling host behaviors, a difference reflected in the phrase “epidemiological transition.” As countries develop economically, the field of public health has come to see a familiar shift in the leading causes of morbidity and mortality. This shift has important implications for thinking about public health interventions in both moral and scientific terms.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse I
• Subjects

---

---

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.