Compulsory moral bioenhancement should be covert.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
Read Online Read More Add to Saved list
  • Author(s): Crutchfield P;Crutchfield P
  • Source:
    Bioethics [Bioethics] 2019 Jan; Vol. 33 (1), pp. 112-121. Date of Electronic Publication: 2018 Aug 29.
  • Publication Type:
    Journal Article
  • Language:
    English
  • Additional Information
    • Source:
      Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 8704792 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1467-8519 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 02699702 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Bioethics Subsets: MEDLINE
    • Publication Information:
      Publication: Oxford : Wiley-Blackwell
      Original Publication: Oxford ; New York : Basil Blackwell, c1987-
    • Subject Terms:
      Bioethical Issues* ; Disclosure* ; Dissent and Disputes* ; Morals*; Biomedical Enhancement/*ethics ; Mandatory Programs/*ethics ; Public Health/*ethics; Attitude ; Behavior Control ; Coercion ; Freedom ; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice ; Humans ; Knowledge ; Personal Autonomy ; Social Behavior ; Social Values
    • Abstract:
      Some theorists argue that moral bioenhancement ought to be compulsory. I take this argument one step further, arguing that if moral bioenhancement ought to be compulsory, then its administration ought to be covert rather than overt. This is to say that it is morally preferable for compulsory moral bioenhancement to be administered without the recipients knowing that they are receiving the enhancement. My argument for this is that if moral bioenhancement ought to be compulsory, then its administration is a matter of public health, and for this reason should be governed by public health ethics. I argue that the covert administration of a compulsory moral bioenhancement program better conforms to public health ethics than does an overt compulsory program. In particular, a covert compulsory program promotes values such as liberty, utility, equality, and autonomy better than an overt program does. Thus, a covert compulsory moral bioenhancement program is morally preferable to an overt moral bioenhancement program.
      (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)
    • Comments:
      Comment in: Bioethics. 2019 Jul;33(6):725-728. (PMID: 30989673)
      Comment in: Bioethics. 2020 Feb;34(2):190-194. (PMID: 31639224)
    • Contributed Indexing:
      Keywords: autonomy; harm; moral enhancement; public health ethics; public policy
    • Publication Date:
      Date Created: 20180830 Date Completed: 20191203 Latest Revision: 20191203
    • Publication Date:
      20240628
    • Accession Number:
      10.1111/bioe.12496
    • Accession Number:
      30157295