Abstract
In this article, I argue that even if we hold that at least some paternalistic behaviour is impermissible when directed towards innocent persons, in certain cases, the same behaviour is permissible when directed towards criminal offenders. I also defend the claim that in some cases it is morally preferable to behave paternalistically towards offenders as an alternative to traditional methods of punishment. I propose that the reason paternalistic behaviour is sometimes permissible towards an offender is the same reason that inflicting intentional harm on an offender is permissible – namely, that it is sometimes a morally justified method of punishing an offender for his wrongdoing.
Highlights
In this article, I argue that even if we hold that at least some paternalistic behaviour is impermissible when directed towards innocent persons, in certain cases, the same behaviour is permissible when directed towards criminal offenders
I propose that the reason paternalistic behaviour is sometimes permissible towards an offender is the same reason that inflicting intentional harm on an offender is permissible – namely, that it is sometimes a morally justified method of punishing an offender for his wrongdoing
I have argued that even if paternalistic behaviour is impermissible towards innocent persons, the same paternalistic behaviour can be permissible when directed towards offenders
Summary
Recall the examples above where, as a response to an offence, we deny the offender cigarettes on the grounds that smoking is bad for his health, or where we compel an offender to read works of valuable literature to benefit him. In the case of requiring the offender to participate in a valuable activity, we require him to do it with the intention he will benefit from it; and we have the negative judgement that without the compulsion he is less likely to do it These instances of paternalistic behaviour can be punishment. We might have the general intention to punish the offender, and so intend to inflict pro tanto harm on him. The person imposing the punishment believes he is only justified in selecting from among possible actions that inflict pro tanto harm on the offender. Many instances of paternalistic behaviour can constitute punishment They can meet the harm requirement, and express disapproval of wrongdoing
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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
