{"title":"Kidney Sales and Disrespectful Demands: A Reply to Rippon.","authors":"Luke Semrau","doi":"10.1093/jmp/jhae033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Simon Rippon, revising an earlier argument against kidney sales, now claims that offers involving the performance of invasive acts, when extended to people under pressure, constitute a kind of rights violation, Impermissibly Disrespectful Demands. Since offers involving kidney sales so qualify, Rippon finds prima facie reason to prohibit them. The present article levels four independent objections to Rippon's argument: the account of Impermissibly Disrespectful Demands implausibly condemns kidney donation as much as kidney sales; the normative importance of having autonomous veto control over bodily incursions does not plausibly underwrite a right to not be extended invasive offers under pressure; Impermissibly Disrespectful Demands can easily be transformed into innocuous offers; and the prohibition has greater welfare costs than Rippon acknowledges.</p>","PeriodicalId":47377,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medicine and Philosophy","volume":" ","pages":"522-531"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medicine and Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhae033","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Simon Rippon, revising an earlier argument against kidney sales, now claims that offers involving the performance of invasive acts, when extended to people under pressure, constitute a kind of rights violation, Impermissibly Disrespectful Demands. Since offers involving kidney sales so qualify, Rippon finds prima facie reason to prohibit them. The present article levels four independent objections to Rippon's argument: the account of Impermissibly Disrespectful Demands implausibly condemns kidney donation as much as kidney sales; the normative importance of having autonomous veto control over bodily incursions does not plausibly underwrite a right to not be extended invasive offers under pressure; Impermissibly Disrespectful Demands can easily be transformed into innocuous offers; and the prohibition has greater welfare costs than Rippon acknowledges.
期刊介绍：
This bimonthly publication explores the shared themes and concerns of philosophy and the medical sciences. Central issues in medical research and practice have important philosophical dimensions, for, in treating disease and promoting health, medicine involves presuppositions about human goals and values. Conversely, the concerns of philosophy often significantly relate to those of medicine, as philosophers seek to understand the nature of medical knowledge and the human condition in the modern world. In addition, recent developments in medical technology and treatment create moral problems that raise important philosophical questions. The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy aims to provide an ongoing forum for the discussion of such themes and issues.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
