-
195ExploitationPrinceton University Press. 1996.In this book, Alan Wertheimer seeks to identify when a transaction or relationship can be properly regarded as exploitative--and not oppressive, manipulative, or morally deficient in some other way--and explores the moral weight of taking ...
-
5
-
25
-
111Review of Ruth Sample, Exploitation: What it is and why it's wrong (review)Utilitas 19 (2): 259--261. 2007.
-
59Forgiveness and public deliberation: The practice of restorative justiceCriminal Justice Ethics 21 (1): 3-20. 2002.No abstract
-
67Consent to Sexual RelationsCambridge University Press. 2003.When does a woman give valid consent to sexual relations? When does her consent render it morally or legally permissible for a man to have sexual relations with her? Why is sexual consent generally regarded as an issue about female consent? And what is the moral significance of consent? These are some of the questions discussed in this important book, which will appeal to a wide readership in philosophy, law, and the social sciences. Alan Wertheimer develops a theory of consent to sexual relatio…Read more
-
135Ruth J. Sample, exploitation: What it is and why it's wrong (lanham, md.: Rowman and Littlefield, 2003), pp. XIV + 197Utilitas 19 (2): 259-261. 2007.
-
40Why is Coerced Consent Worse Than No Consent and Deceived Consent?Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 42 (2): 114-131. 2017.The Standard View in research ethics maintains that, under certain conditions, investigators may deceive subjects and may enroll subjects without their consent. In contrast, it is always impermissible to coerce subjects to enroll, even when the same conditions are satisfied. This view raises a question that, as far as we are aware, has received no attention in the literature. Why is it always impermissible to undermine the validity of subjects’ consent through coercion, but it can be permissible…Read more
-
17Liberty, coercion, and the limits of the stateIn Robert L. Simon (ed.), The Blackwell Guide to Social and Political Philosophy, Wiley-blackwell. 2002.The prelims comprise: Liberty and Coercion Liberty‐Limiting Principles The Harm Principle The Offense Principle Legal Paternalism Legal Moralism Justice Need Conclusion Bibliography.
-
49Freedom, morality, plea bargaining, and the supreme courtPhilosophy and Public Affairs 8 (3): 203-234. 1979.
-
31Three. Torts: Assumed risk and informed consentIn Coercion, Princeton University Press. pp. 54-70. 1990.
-
72No Exceptionalism Needed to Treat TerroristsAmerican Journal of Bioethics 9 (10): 53-54. 2009.Gesundheit and colleagues offer dramatic examples of the medical treatment of terrorists but then pose the suggestion that those who engage in terrorism forfeit their right to medical care, and, consequently, that physicians have no obligation to treat them. Their argument presupposes that a physician’s obligation to provide medical care depends on the patients’ right to health care. Therefore, someone who commits heinous and abhorrent acts thereby waives the right to health care and the phy…Read more
-
10Eight. Duress and necessity as defenses in the criminal lawIn Coercion, Princeton University Press. pp. 144-169. 1990.
-
1Internal disagreements: Deliberation and abortionIn Stephen Macedo (ed.), Deliberative politics: essays on democracy and disagreement, Oxford University Press. pp. 175. 1999.
-
71Voluntary Consent: Why a Value-Neutral Concept Won't WorkJournal of Medicine and Philosophy 37 (3): 226-254. 2012.Some maintain that voluntariness is a value-neutral concept. On that view, someone acts involuntarily if subject to a controlling influence or has no acceptable alternatives. I argue that a value-neutral conception of voluntariness cannot explain when and why consent is invalid and that we need a moralized account of voluntariness. On that view, most concerns about the voluntariness of consent to participate in research are not well founded
-
46Reevaluating the Right to Withdraw From Research Without PenaltyAmerican Journal of Bioethics 11 (4): 14-16. 2011.In “Assessing the Remedy: The Case for Contracts in Clinical Trials,” Sarah Edwards (2011) proposes that research participants acquire contractual obligations to investigators, thus opening the doo...