Should children, the mentally-challenged, etc. have full control over their own bodies?

Reply

EconomicsNewbie Posted: Tue, Sep 15 2009 9:06 PM

rated by 0 users

I am curious as to what people on this forum think about this. I personally believe in the self-ownership axiom, and I asked a friend if he did. He said yes, except for children and people with disabilities which render them unable to know what's best for them. I realized that he has a point (for example, if a child told me he was going to stab himself, I would definitely physically restrain him/her from doing so). But this is also a slippery slope. How do you determine who should have control over their own bodies?

Reply

Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu replied on Wed, Sep 16 2009 10:12 PM

rated by 0 users

IMO, any thing / person which could conceivably gather protection consciously should have full rights over their bodies. The mere possibility puts them in the same class as full-fledged humans and the same natural laws (and consequences) would apply to them.

You might ask if it's okay to prevent someone from committing suicide. Well, it depends, and no sane ethical system could provide you with a definitive algorithm to decide righteousness in all cases. And failing to correctly judge the situation, no matter the intentions, does not make guilt or blame go away.

For example, if you repeatedly restrain someone from killing himself and he continues to feel the same way and hates you for what you're doing to him, you're doing something wrong. And this goes for children and people with disabilities as well.