E-Book Overview
This book explains what inalienable rights are and how they restrict the behavior of their possessors. McConnell develops compelling arguments to support the inalienability of the right to life, the right of conscience, and a competent person's right not to have medical treatment administered without consent. Yet, surprisingly, he argues that the inalienability of the right to life does not entail that voluntary euthanasia or assisted suicide are wrong. This distinctive defense of inalienable rights will appeal to medical ethicists and other applied ethicists, political theorists, and philosophers of law.
E-Book Content
INALIENABLE RIGHTS
This page intentionally left blank
INALIENABLE RIGHTS The Limits of Consent in Medicine and the Law
Terrance McConnell
1 2000
3 Oxford New York Athens Auckland Bangkok Bogotá Buenos Aires Calcutta Cape Town Chennai Dar es Salaam Delhi Florence Hong Kong Istanbul Karachi Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Mumbai Nairobi Paris São Paulo Singapore Taipei Tokyo Toronto Warsaw and associated companies in Berlin Ibadan
Copyright © 2000 by Terrance McConnell Published by Oxford University Press, Inc. 198 Madision Avenue, New York, New York 10016 Oxford is a registered trademark of Oxford University Press All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of Oxford University Press. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data McConnell, Terrance C. Inalienable rights: the limits of consent in medicine and the law / Terrance McConnell. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-19-513462-1 1. Informed consent (Medical law)—United States. 2. Human rights. 3. Natural law. I. Title. KF3827.I5M39 2000 344.73'0412—dc21 99-41540 [ISBN 0-19-462-1 (cloth)]
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper
Preface
I began thinking about the topic of inalienable rights in the early 1980s. While teaching courses in the philosophy of law, I often used books and articles written by Joel Feinberg. As anyone reading this probably knows, Feinberg’s works are invariably clear, informative, and provocative. I used his essay on inalienable rights (discussed extensively in chapter 1 of this book) in several of my classes. It stimulated much discussion among students and much thought on my part. Prominent among the issues that Feinberg’s essay raised in my mind were questions about the very concept of an inalienable right, questions about the relationship between inalienable rights and paternalism, and wonder about what normative implications follow from a commitment to the inalienability of some rights. All of this reflection led me to publish a paper in 1984 discussing some of these issues. After that, I began working on other projects, including a scholarly book and the second edition of a textbook. I did not return to full reflection on the issues raised by inalienable rights until the mid-1990s. But in the intervening time, questions about inalienable rights arose occasionally, especially in teaching biomedical ethics. I have finally been able to address these questions in detail in writing this book. Much of the work done on this book was during the academic year 1995–1996. Generous support for my research and writing was provided by two sources: the National Endowment for the Humanities, which awarded me a Fellowship for College Teachers; and the University of North Carolina at Greensboro, which provided me with a year-long research assignment, thereby freeing me from teaching and administrative responsibilities. Without this support, this book would still be unfinished. I am happy to express my gratit