Paternalism is behavior, by a person, organization or state, which limits some
person or group's liberty or autonomy for that person's or group's own good.
Paternalism can also imply that the behavior is against or regardless of the
will of a person, or also that the behavior expresses an attitude of
superiority. The word paternalism is from the Greek
pater for father, though paternalism should be distinguished from patriarchy.
Some, such as John Stuart Mill, think paternalism to be appropriate towards
children: "It is, perhaps, hardly necessary to say that this doctrine is
meant to apply only to human beings in the maturity of their faculties. We are
not speaking of children, or of young persons below the age which the law may
fix as that of manhood or womanhood." Paternalism towards adults is sometimes
thought to treat them as if they were children.
Examples Examples of paternalism include laws
requiring the use of motorcycle helmets, laws punishing citizens for not
obtaining their driving license in time, a parent forbidding their children to
engage in dangerous activities, and a psychiatrist confiscating sharp objects
from someone who is suicidally depressed.
Soft and hard paternalism The terms soft and hard are used in two
quite different senses in this context. Philosophers, following Joel Feinberg's
influential book Harm to Self, usually use "soft paternalism" for paternalism
towards a person whose action or choice is insufficiently voluntary to be
genuinely his or hers. Hard paternalism in this usage means paternalism towards
a person whose action or choice is sufficiently voluntary to be genuinely
his or hers. Soft paternalism in this usage may also refer to interference
with a person aimed to establish whether or not his or her action or choice is
sufficiently voluntary. In contrast, economists and lawyers usually use "soft
paternalism" for mild paternalism, that is paternalism that is not coercive, or
not very "heavy-handed". For example, libertarian paternalism is soft
paternalism in this sense. Hard paternalism in this usage is coercive
paternalism. Criteria for effective paternalism
Thomas Pogge argues that there are a number of criteria for paternalism.
The concept should work within human flourishing. Generally accepted items
such as nutrition, clothing, shelter, certain basic freedoms may be acceptable
by a range of religious and social backgrounds.
The criteria should be "modest". The requirements of the criteria should
not be understood as exhaustive; leaving societies the ability to modify the
criteria based on their own needs. The supplementary considerations
introduced by such more ambitious criteria of justice must not be allowed
to outweigh the modest considerations. Opponents of paternalism
In his Two Treatises of Government, John Locke argues that political and paternal
power cannot be identified. Mill opposes state paternalism on the grounds that
individuals know their own good better than the state does, that the moral
equality of persons demands respect for others' liberty, and that paternalism
disrupts the development of an independent character. In On Liberty he
writes: ...the only purpose for which power can
be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his
will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is
not a sufficient warrant. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear
because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier,
because, in the opinion of others, to do so would be wise, or even right.
Contemporary opponents of paternalism often appeal to the ideal of personal
autonomy. See also
Adultism Obscurantism
Soft paternalism Industrial paternalism
Rule according to higher law References
External links Paternalism, by Peter Suber. From
Philosophy of Law: An Encyclopedia, edited by Christopher Berry Gray,
Garland Pub. Co., 1999, vol. II, pp. 632–635.
Paternalism, by Gerald Dworkin. From The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Counting the Dragon's Teeth and Claws: The Definition of Hard Paternalism by
Thaddeus Mason Pope. From 20 Georgia State University Law Review 659-722
Monstrous Impersonation: A Critique of Consent-Based Justifications for Hard
Paternalism by Thaddeus Mason Pope. From 73 UMKC Law Review 681-713
Is Public Health Paternalism Really Never Justified? A Response to Joel
Feinberg by Thaddeus Mason Pope. From 30 Oklahoma City University Law Review
121-207