Between Reason and Coercion: Ethically Permissible Influence in Health Care and Health Policy Contexts

In bioethics, the predominant categorization of various types of influence has been a tripartite classification of rational persuasion (meaning influence by reason and argument), coercion (meaning influence by irresistible threats—or on a few accounts, offers), and manipulation (meaning everything i...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Blumenthal-Barby, J. S. (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press 2012
In: Kennedy Institute of Ethics journal
Year: 2012, Volume: 22, Issue: 4, Pages: 345-366
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)

MARC

LEADER 00000caa a22000002 4500
001 1826988025
003 DE-627
005 20230428033645.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 221214s2012 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)1826988025 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1826988025 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Blumenthal-Barby, J. S.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Between Reason and Coercion: Ethically Permissible Influence in Health Care and Health Policy Contexts 
264 1 |c 2012 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a In bioethics, the predominant categorization of various types of influence has been a tripartite classification of rational persuasion (meaning influence by reason and argument), coercion (meaning influence by irresistible threats—or on a few accounts, offers), and manipulation (meaning everything in between). The standard ethical analysis in bioethics has been that rational persuasion is always permissible, and coercion is almost always impermissible save a few cases such as imminent threat to self or others. However, many forms of influence fall into the broad middle terrain—and this terrain is in desperate need of conceptual refining and ethical analysis in light of recent interest in using principles from behavioral science to influence health decisions and behaviors. This paper aims to address the neglected space between rational persuasion and coercion in bioethics. First, I argue for conceptual revisions that include removing the "manipulation" label and relabeling this space "nonargumentative]influence," with two subtypes: "reason-bypassing" and "reason-countering." Second, I argue that bioethicists have made the mistake of relying heavily on the conceptual categories themselves for normative work and instead should assess the ethical permissibility of a particular instance of influence by asking several key ethical questions, which I elucidate, that relate to (1) the impact of the form of influence on autonomy and (2) the relationship between the influencer and the influenced. Finally, I apply my analysis to two examples of nonargumentative influence in health care and health policy: (1) governmental agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) trying to influence the public to be healthier using nonargumentative measures such as vivid images on cigarette packages to make more salient the negative effects of smoking, and (2) a physician framing a surgery in terms of survival rates instead of mortality rates to influence her patient to consent to the surgery. 
601 |a Influencer 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |a Kennedy Institute of Ethics  |t Kennedy Institute of Ethics journal  |d Baltimore, Md. : Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1991  |g 22(2012), 4, Seite 345-366  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)320481840  |w (DE-600)2009887-X  |w (DE-576)266818668  |x 1086-3249  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:22  |g year:2012  |g number:4  |g pages:345-366 
856 4 0 |u https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/1/article/495158  |x Verlag  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4230898894 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1826988025 
LOK |0 005 20221214052550 
LOK |0 008 221214||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-12-05#3BF025EF0B8F1C6149E1F8B4A3F906699C239D86 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixrk  |a zota 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw