School of Public Health & Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, USA
The recent report by Barnhill and King about obesity prevention policy raises important issues for discussion and analysis. In response, this article raises four points for further consideration. First, a distinction between equality and justice needs to be made and consistently maintained. Second, different theories of justice highlight one additional important source of disagreement about the ethical propriety of the proposed obesity prevention policies. Third, another point of contention arises with respect to different understandings of the principle of respect for autonomy due to its often-mistaken equation with simple, unfettered freedom. Finally, based on a more robust definition of autonomy, the key issues in obesity prevention policies can be suitably re-framed in terms of whether they advance just social conditions that enable people to realize human capabilities to the fullest extent possible.
Barnhill A, King K. Ethical agreement and disagreement about obesity prevention policy in the United States. International Journal of Health Policy and Management 2013; 1: 117–20. doi: 10.15171/ijhpm.2013.21
Cohen-Cole E, Fletcher JM. Is obesity contagious? Social networks vs. environmental factors in the obesity epidemic. J Health Econ 2008; 27: 1382–7. doi: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2008.04.005
Sandel M. Justice: What’s the right thing to do? New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux; 2010.
Kekes J. Justice: A conservative view. Soc Philos Policy 2006; 23: 88–108.
Berlin I. Two Concepts of Liberty. In: Berlin I. Four Essays on Liberty. London: Oxford University Press; 1969. doi: 10.1017/s0012217300028821
Mill JS. On Liberty. 2nd edition. Mineola, New York: Dover Publication; 1859.
Buchanan D. Autonomy, paternalism and justice: ethical priorities in public health. Am J Public Health 2008; 98: 15–21.