#Harm principle series

#Harm principle series

Finally, I will suggest a series of criteria that can be used in deciding whether the state should intervene in a parent's decision to refuse medical care on behalf of a child. Rather, I will suggest that the Harm Principle provides a more appropriate threshold for state intervention than the Best Interest standard. Principles of Political Economy, where Mill writes that the province of. In this paper, I will argue that the best interest standard provides insufficient guidance for decision-making regarding children and does not reflect the actual standard used by medical providers and courts. Beyond On Liberty, the most prominent formulation of the harm principle appears in. One of the problems we run into is that harm is reciprocal. The harm principle is a necessary, but not sufficient, reason for government intervention. The best interests standard is the threshold most frequently employed in challenging a parent's refusal to provide consent for a child's medical care. The harm principle states that the only reason to restrict the actions of individuals is to prevent harm to others. In fact, all doctors, psychologists, psychotherapists and clinical social workers are well aware of Primum non nocere, the Latin. It follows that Feinberg's principle is a permissive principle that takes form 2c) and that it states an INUS condition. In other words, a person can do whatever he wants as long as his actions do not harm others. Parental authority is not absolute, however, and when a parent acts contrary to the best interests of a child, the state may intervene. The American Psychological Association’s Principle A: Beneficence and Nonmaleficencestates that psychologists strive to benefit those with whom they work and take care to do no harm. Yet the harm principle is a necessary part of other sets of conditions, satisfaction of which also suffices to make coercive regulation permissible. The harm principle states that the only actions that can be prevented are ones that create harm. Minors are generally considered incompetent to provide legally binding decisions regarding their health care, and parents or guardians are empowered to make those decisions on their behalf. scope of liberties the harm principle according to mill, all restraint, qua restraint, is evil and leaving people to themselves is always better, ceteris paribus, than controlling them. This paper aims to provide an understanding in John Stuart Mills the principle of harm to others, as the preventive approach against tyranny of the.