The next section of Lauren Hall's "A Classical-Liberal Response to the Crisis of Bioethics" article is entitled "Classical-Liberal Institutions and Bioethics". She reviews the concepts of property rights, subsidiarity, and polycentricity. The author also evaluates the role of courts in controversial bioethical cases.
Hall's discussion of property rights is a mixed bag, for she rightly notes that "the right of property limits the arbitrary power of government," but she wrongly believes it "is unclear precisely how far the notion of property rights will get us in determining the rights patients have and the kinds of moral limitations we may place on biotechnologies broadly speaking."
The subsidiarity ("placing the authority for decisions at the lowest possible level") discussion is also complicated, for the author rightly understands that this concept "is required because we lack omniscience", but wrongly asserts that local "governments or individuals should handle local problems, and a central authority should handle national problems."
The polycentricity discussion is more positive, for Hall recognizes that common law is a polycentric order and such "orders are useful because they allow for constant adaptation to changing circumstances … ."
This section of the article ends with the author recommending against the use of State courts to settle biomedical disputes because court decisions "are usually adversarial" and "deal with legal matters rather than with moral, ethical, and practical concerns."
Hall's discussion of property rights is a mixed bag, for she rightly notes that "the right of property limits the arbitrary power of government," but she wrongly believes it "is unclear precisely how far the notion of property rights will get us in determining the rights patients have and the kinds of moral limitations we may place on biotechnologies broadly speaking."
The subsidiarity ("placing the authority for decisions at the lowest possible level") discussion is also complicated, for the author rightly understands that this concept "is required because we lack omniscience", but wrongly asserts that local "governments or individuals should handle local problems, and a central authority should handle national problems."
The polycentricity discussion is more positive, for Hall recognizes that common law is a polycentric order and such "orders are useful because they allow for constant adaptation to changing circumstances … ."
This section of the article ends with the author recommending against the use of State courts to settle biomedical disputes because court decisions "are usually adversarial" and "deal with legal matters rather than with moral, ethical, and practical concerns."
RSS Feed
