"On its face, suicide prevention is the kind of phenomenon that lends support to paternalism. Suicide often seems prudentially ill-advised, a choice wherein a person ends up depriving themselves of a longer, better life. Furthermore, it is a choice where we seem to have reason to suspect that the person's judgment or volition is somehow impaired, because (say) they are acting impulsively, are overwhelmed by their present suffering."
"Paternalistic Presumption: For any particular individual S who entertains suicidal thoughts, makes plans for suicide, or engages in suicidal conduct, others have sufficient paternalistic reasons (that S's dying by suicide would be harmful to them) for preventing S from ending their life due to suicide by using measure M such that the burden of proof falls on the side of refraining from using M."
Suicide prevention appears to justify paternalistic interventions because suicide often seems imprudent and involves impaired judgment or volition. People contemplating suicide may act impulsively, be overwhelmed by present suffering, or suffer from affective disorders like depression that impair appreciation of reasons to continue living. The Paternalistic Presumption states that, for any individual S who entertains suicidal thoughts, others have sufficient paternalistic reasons to prevent S's suicide using measure M, placing the burden of proof on refraining from M. The case concedes arguendo that suicide prevention measures can in principle be justified on paternalistic grounds but challenges the Paternalistic Presumption.
Read at Apaonline
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]