Paternalism is the interference of a state or an individual with another person, against their will. The practice of paternalism is usually justified on the grounds that the interference is necessary as the person or persons affected would be better off, or protected from harm as a result of the rule, policy, or action (Dworkin, 2002). The concept of paternalism invites a great deal of controversy and debate because although the stated intention is benevolent, paternalism assumes that the enforcer possesses a larger wisdom than the person being interfered with (Suber, 1999). Indeed, it is this premise that leads to parents running interference with their children or governments legislating on a wide range of issues such as abortion, euthanasia, same-sex marriages, substance abuse etc. While, no
Indeed, it is the latter consideration that brings into question the ethics of paternalism.
If paternalism is evaluated purely on a theoretical basis, the fact that it violates individual
liberty is sufficient to argue that it is immoral. However, in practice, there are several instances where it is evident that paternalism is, in fact, necessary to protect the interests of a person or persons. For example, the fact that parents must necessarily run interference with their children in order to protect them from harm is pretty much unquestionable, since children are still developing cognitive skills in their formative years. Similarly, although citizens may grumble about being coerced into paying taxes or contributing to
Social Security, the fact is that such economic policies are designed in the larger interests of
social justice. Indeed, it can even be argued that both children and responsible, adult members of…
