Abstract
Debates concerning whether Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) mitigates responsibility often involve recourse to its genetic and neurodevelopmental etiology. For such arguments, individuals with ADHD have diminished self-control, and hence do not fully satisfy the control condition for responsibility, when there is a genetic or neurodevelopmental etiology for this diminished capacity. In this article, I argue that the role of genetic and neurobiological explanations has been overstated in evaluations of responsibility. While ADHD has genetic and neurobiological causes, rather than embrace the essentialistic notion that it directly diminishes self-control and, therefore, responsibility, we ought to think of ADHD as constraining only some self-control practices. In particular, situational self-control strategies remain feasible for people with ADHD. However, not all individuals have access to these strategies. I suggest a way to evaluate responsibility in terms of situational rather than agential pleas, which tracks whether the individual had access to self-control behaviors. While I restrict my discussion to ADHD, the access-based approach is also relevant for assessments of responsibility for other cases where self-control failures are at stake.
Highlights
Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is often1 seen as decreasing the degree to which one can be held responsible.2 A standard conception of moral responsibility holds that it involves a control condition, i.e., that agents can only be held responsible to the extent that they were in control of their behavior
The responsibility of persons with ADHD is mitigated, it seems, because genetic and neurodevelopmental causes have contributed to their having a diminished capacity for self-control, thereby undermining the extent to which these agents are in control of their behavior
In the beginning of this paper, I described lay and professional views that consider the genetic etiology of ADHD, and its status as a neurobiological disorder, to inform responsibility assessments in a way that appears to support agential pleas
Summary
Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is often1 seen as decreasing the degree to which one can be held responsible.2 A standard conception of moral responsibility holds that it involves a control condition, i.e., that agents can only be held responsible to the extent that they were in control of their behavior. The responsibility of persons with ADHD is mitigated, it seems, because genetic and neurodevelopmental causes have contributed to their having a diminished capacity for self-control, thereby undermining the extent to which these agents are in control of their behavior. I argue that situational pleas ought to be preferred to agential pleas when discussing moral and criminal responsibility for failures of self-control, including in persons with ADHD.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call