Nonconsensual Neurocorrectives and Bodily Integrity: a Reply to Shaw and Barn
Neuroethics 12 (1):107-118 (2019)
Abstract
In this issue, Elizabeth Shaw and Gulzaar Barn offer a number of replies to my arguments in ‘Criminal Rehabilitation Through Medical Intervention: Moral Liability and the Right to Bodily Integrity’, Journal of Ethics. In this article I respond to some of their criticisms.
Keywords
Categories
ISBN(s)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
DOUNNA
Revision history
Archival date: 2018-03-07
View upload history
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Criminal Rehabilitation Through Medical Intervention: Moral Liability and the Right to Bodily Integrity.Douglas, Thomas
Punishment, Communication and Community.Duff, Antony
The Right to Bodily Integrity and the Rehabilitation of Offenders Through Medical Interventions: A Reply to Thomas Douglas.Shaw, Elizabeth
Punishment, Communication and Community.Lacey, Nicola
Censure and Sanctions.Von Hirsch, Andrew
View all 8 references / Add more references
Citations of this work BETA
Self-Control in Responsibility Enhancement and Criminal Rehabilitation.Koi, Polaris; Uusitalo, Susanne & Tuominen, Jarno
Respect, Punishment and Mandatory Neurointerventions.Holmen, Sebastian Jon
Added to PP index
2016-08-24
Total views
101 ( #32,971 of 50,070 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
15 ( #34,351 of 50,070 )
2016-08-24
Total views
101 ( #32,971 of 50,070 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
15 ( #34,351 of 50,070 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.
