Chapter 8 Three Rationales for a Legal Right to Mental Integrity
Many states recognize a legal right to bodily integrity, understood as a right against significant, nonconsensual interference with one's body. Recently, some have called for the recognition of an analogous legal right to mental integrity: a right against significant, nonconsensual interference...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Electronic Book Chapter |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Springer Nature
2021
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | OAPEN Library: download the publication OAPEN Library: description of the publication |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
MARC
| LEADER | 00000naaaa2200000uu 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | oapen_2024_20_500_12657_54057 | ||
| 005 | 20220414 | ||
| 003 | oapen | ||
| 006 | m o d | ||
| 007 | cr|mn|---annan | ||
| 008 | 20220414s2021 xx |||||o ||| 0|eng d | ||
| 020 | |a 978-3-030-69277-3_8 | ||
| 020 | |a 9783030692766 | ||
| 040 | |a oapen |c oapen | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/978-3-030-69277-3_8 |c doi | |
| 041 | 0 | |a eng | |
| 042 | |a dc | ||
| 072 | 7 | |a PSA |2 bicssc | |
| 100 | 1 | |a Douglas, Thomas |4 auth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Forsberg, Lisa |4 auth | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Chapter 8 Three Rationales for a Legal Right to Mental Integrity |
| 260 | |b Springer Nature |c 2021 | ||
| 300 | |a 1 electronic resource (23 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 Many states recognize a legal right to bodily integrity, understood as a right against significant, nonconsensual interference with one's body. Recently, some have called for the recognition of an analogous legal right to mental integrity: a right against significant, nonconsensual interference with one's mind. In this chapter, we describe and distinguish three different rationales for recognizing such a right. The first appeals to case-based intuitions to establish a distinctive duty not to interfere with others' minds; the second holds that, if we accept a legal right to bodily integrity, then we must, on pain of philosophical inconsistency, accept a case for an analogous right over the mind; and the third holds that recent technological developments create a need for a legal right to mental integrity. | ||
| 536 | |a H2020 European Research Council | ||
| 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 Life sciences: general issues |2 bicssc | |
| 653 | |a mental integrity; legal right | ||
| 773 | 1 | 0 | |t Neurolaw |7 nnaa |o OAPEN Library UUID: ad387141-94f3-455c-9cb3-3fb5645c7280 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |a www.oapen.org |u https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/id/b11feef6-2068-4d38-a824-69c7357afe93/Douglas-Forsberg2021_Chapter_ThreeRationalesForALegalRightT.pdf |7 0 |z OAPEN Library: download the publication |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |a www.oapen.org |u https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/54057 |7 0 |z OAPEN Library: description of the publication |