Chapter 5 Is Preventive Detention Morally Worse than Quarantine?

Preventive detention shares many features with the quarantine measures sometimes employed in the context of infectious disease control. Both interventions involve imposing constraints on freedom of movement and association. Both interventions are standardly undeserved: in quarantine, the detained in...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Douglas, Thomas (auth)
Format: Electronic Book Chapter
Language:English
Published: Hart Publishers 2019
Subjects:
Online Access:DOAB: download the publication
DOAB: description of the publication
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

MARC

LEADER 00000naaaa2200000uu 4500
001 doab_20_500_12854_69543
005 20210506
003 oapen
006 m o d
007 cr|mn|---annan
008 20210506s2019 xx |||||o ||| 0|eng d
040 |a oapen  |c oapen 
041 0 |a eng 
042 |a dc 
072 7 |a LNFX1  |2 bicssc 
100 1 |a Douglas, Thomas  |4 auth 
245 1 0 |a Chapter 5 Is Preventive Detention Morally Worse than Quarantine? 
260 |b Hart Publishers  |c 2019 
300 |a 1 electronic resource (15 p.) 
336 |a text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a computer  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a online resource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
506 0 |a Open Access  |2 star  |f Unrestricted online access 
520 |a Preventive detention shares many features with the quarantine measures sometimes employed in the context of infectious disease control. Both interventions involve imposing constraints on freedom of movement and association. Both interventions are standardly undeserved: in quarantine, the detained individual deserves no detention (or so I will assume), and in preventive detention, the individual has already endured any detention that can be justified by reference to desert. Both interventions are, in contrast to civil commitment under mental health legislation, normally imposed on more-or-less fully autonomous individuals. And both interventions are intended to reduce the risk that the constrained individual poses to the public. Yet despite these similarities, preventive detention and quarantine have received rather different moral report cards, with preventive detention attracting far greater criticism. One possible explanation for this is that many people implicitly endorse the view that preventive detention is always, in at least one respect, more morally problematic than quarantine. In this chapter I challenge that view by considering and rejecting six attempts to justify it, beginning with four attempts that I think can be easily dismissed, and proceeding to consider in more detail two attempts that are more resilient to criticism. Ultimately, I argue that all six attempts fail: preventive detention is not always more problematic, in one respect, than quarantine. I conclude by drawing out some implications of my argument. Of course, it does not follow from my argument that preventive detention is not in some cases more problematic than quarantine. A secondary purpose of this chapter, pursued in parallel to the first, is to identify the considerations that determine whether and when preventive detention is indeed in some respect more problematic. 
536 |a Wellcome Trust 
540 |a Creative Commons  |f https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/  |2 cc  |4 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 
546 |a English 
650 7 |a Sentencing & punishment  |2 bicssc 
653 |a preventive detention; quarantine 
773 1 0 |t Predictive Sentencing  |7 nnaa  |o OAPEN Library UUID: d0ff1924-12ca-43cf-b32b-e5a3397840ff 
856 4 0 |a www.oapen.org  |u https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/20.500.12657/48490/1/Bookshelf_NBK564167.pdf  |7 0  |z DOAB: download the publication 
856 4 0 |a www.oapen.org  |u https://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/69543  |7 0  |z DOAB: description of the publication