Preview

Explain The Harm Principle By William Feinberg

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1045 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Explain The Harm Principle By William Feinberg
Joel Feinberg says that the harm principle can require certain types of actions. He agrees that the harm principle prevents harm from happening to the public but he also interprets the harm principle in a way that gives the public access to certain types of benefits that prevent harm. However, these benefits are made available by requiring taking action on the public. These benefits include but are not limited too, items such as paying taxes. By requiring the public to pay taxes then they are supporting public benefits. Public benefits are defined in a way that if they were not given then they would cause harm on the public by not being available.
Feinberg says that the public is harmed when they are deprived of their needs. This means that
…show more content…
This could be anything from public parks and libraries to helping take people out of poverty and worse situations. Harm is caused when people are deprived of their needs. The needs of the public are education, fair opportunities, access to public places to expand social interactions, and an assortment of other needs that are community based. If the public is deprived of these needs because we do not interpret the harm principle in a way that provides these needs then we are harming the public just as they could harm one another. This is because if the harm principle is interpreted as just preventing harm from happening to others from acts such as crime then there is no point in having laws that justify having harm …show more content…
This point can only be made though if that person is preventing harm from occurring to another person, even if it is directly or indirectly causing harm. This can be applied in cases of suicide. If one sees a widowed mother about to jump off a side of a building, who in return would be leaving her children behind with no support; therefore, causing harm. Then the bystander would have the authority the jump in and stop the woman from committing suicide. However, if one sees someone with no family or no loved ones about to jump off a building, then they do not have the right to stop them. This is because that person would not be committing harm to anyone but himself or herself, which is not covered in the harm principle. While the bystander may feel obligated to stop the suicide from happening in both cases, it would only be permissible in the first circumstance. In the second circumstance, the person committing suicide, if stopped, could come back in return and say that the bystander caused harm by preventing him or her from committing their own free

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    If one decides to help a person in need, he might actually worsen the situation and increase the size of the injury, which might cause the fellow Good Samaritan to be liable to legal issues. As a result, a lot of people prefer being bystanders instead of helpers in order to prevent legal issues. However, many states are issuing laws to protect fellow Samaritans from facing legal issues. North California issued a law that protects “any person who renders first aid or emergency assistance (Sjoerdsma 360)”, even if they inflict harm on the victim. Consequently, Virginia has issued similar laws legally protecting a person who chooses to “renders emergency care or assistance, without compensation (360)”. Naturally though, with Good Samaritan laws being legislated, corresponding laws will be issued to protect the Good Samaritan.…

    • 684 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    A. Beneficence and nonmaleficence- This principle represents a psychologist dual obligation to strive to do good and avoid harm. It intends to guard against harm to anyone that you come in contact with.…

    • 1611 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Actually bystander effect is an example case under the topic of Prosocial Behavior (Kendra, n.d.). It indicated a extensive scope of actions that people behave as a person who kindly to help, share and collaboration with others (Kendra, n.d.). The bystander effect is a social psychological phenomenon illustrate even a person at the scene of the dangerous, he/she still not give a hand to the victim when there are other people present. The…

    • 622 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Bystanders always play a key role in any event, whether they have a positive or negative effect on the outcome of the situation at hand. Most, if not all, of the bystanders during…

    • 1201 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The bystander effect, bystander effect is a social psychological that refers to cases where people do not offer help to someone who needs help in front of other people. Usually when a person sees someone in danger or someone that needs help, they try and avoid or stay away from the situation so they don’t get in the middle or get hurt. The more bystanders there are most likely the victim will be severely hurt or even killed (Wikipedia Contributors).…

    • 615 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Cja 354: Criminal Capacity

    • 1411 Words
    • 6 Pages

    115). When one has committed an act of violence, he or she naturally wants to justify the reasons. For many who commit a criminal act the best defense is justification. According to the author, some examples of justification can be, “self-defense, necessity, and defense of others (Schmalleger, 2010, pg. 116). Self-defense is when “a person has fundamental right to protect his or her self and that to rationally safeguard oneself from an illegal assault is a natural response when faced with a threatening situation” (Schmalleger, 2010, pg. 119). Necessity is a claim made by the defense, in which, “the defendant believed it was necessary to behave illegally to prohibit or deter a greater damage or injury” (Schmalleger, 2010, pg. 116). The defense of others occurs when one person defends another who appears to be in harm’s way (Schmalleger, 2010, pg. 126). However, as the author states, “defense of others is sometimes called “defense of a third person,” is circumscribed in some jurisdictions by the alter ego rule” (Schmalleger, 2010, pg. 126). The defense of others can be tricky because it does not mean one can intervene in an altercation of one’s friend when that friend started the altercation itself. The alter ego rule is accepted in some jurisdictions but not in others. The alter ego rule, as stated by Schmalleger (2010), is that “some jurisdictions will hold that an individual can solely protect a third party under certain conditions and solely to the degree in which the third party could perform for his or her own benefit” (pg. 126). For example, the state of Texas, based on the Model Penal Code ignores acknowledgement this rule by allowing an individual to defend another person if, “he or she has a rational…

    • 1411 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Suicide by Cop

    • 345 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Suicide by Cop occurs when people want to die, but do not want to kill themselves, so the put themselves in a position where a police officer is forced to shoot them. These incidents are extremely dangerous to police officers because they never know if the individual will try to kill them also. Some suicidal individuals will point an unloaded gun at the police because they know the police will respond by shooting back in self-defense.…

    • 345 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    committing suicidal-acts violate the duties owed others and ourselves. We can then ask, to begin, how would euthanasia violate our duty to ourselves?…

    • 1661 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    First of all Harm minimisation is multiple drug policies in which are used a way of educating individuals and societies about alcohol and other drugs issues, in an act to reduce its harmful and dangerous effects. It was initially developed to help adults how has been involved with substance abuse. These reduction strategies are able to help both an individual and the community, in which who experience the consequences of taking drugs. Harm Minimisation programs are made to consider both the health, social and economic consequences of AOD use for people in the community. Since 1985 the launch of the National Campaign against Drug Abuse and subsequent National Drug Strategy, this has been a key focus and policy of the Federal governments and Australian state.…

    • 399 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Bystander Effect

    • 567 Words
    • 3 Pages

    If the person is to intervene they must first notice the event. Then they must handle the situation as an emergency, and they must decide that it is their personal responsibility to act. At each of these preliminary steps, the bystander of the emergency can remove themselves from the decision process cause them to fail to help. They easily can fail to notice the event, fail to interpret the event as an emergency, or can fail to assume the responsibility to take action. (“Bystander…

    • 567 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The public order advocates main purpose is to protect society’s law abiding citizens from harm. These people believe that under certain circumstances involving a criminal threat to public safety, the interests of society should take precedence over individual rights. In my opinion, I feel that the public order advocates are more important to the overall well-being of society because I think people should have their rights overlooked when putting safety first. For example, after 9/11 security at the airport had the authority to profile certain ethnic groups and subject to body search on all individuals. Some people would say this is a violation of their individual rights. While others understand it’s for everyone’s safety. Another example where public order advocates takes precedence over individual rights is when a pedophile is released back into society his or her rights are limited due to the nature of their crime. Depending on the severity of the crime, some sex offenders have to wear a monitoring bracelet, live a certain distance from schools, and people in the neighborhood are notified when one moves in. The pedophile might think this is a violation of their individual rights but it’s only to protect the public.…

    • 476 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Harm Principle Law

    • 753 Words
    • 4 Pages

    We as humans may think that the punishment toward the criminal may fit the crime that they created. Principle laws, a society ultimately degenerates into despotism--the rule of the strong and violent over the weak and nonviolent. Harm Principle laws are essential, and every government on Earth has them. Some laws are based not strictly on harm or self-harm concerns, but also on promoting the personal morality of the law 's authors (Head, 2014). On a law standpoint, it is wrong to commit a crime against anyone regardless of their circumstances.…

    • 753 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    What gives a bully power? What allows a murder to take place in broad daylight without any intervention from those looking on? What makes a country silent as millions of its citizens are sent to their death under the command of a tyrant? The answer to all these questions is a phenomenon known as the Bystander Effect, in which people are less likely to come to the aid of someone in distress when there are others present. This attitude is born when one believes that other passersby will provide help to the victim, and therefore he or she has less responsibility to intervene. While already unethical when practiced by an individual, it is when this passivity is adopted by an…

    • 1675 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Morality is such a subjective concept and it often depends on the fundamental beliefs every person has. Rationality and morality can be mutually exclusive. Arguing for the rationality of suicide in certain cases is far easier than attempting to defend its morality to the individualized morals others have. However, I would argue that no matter how immoral suicide may be, it would be more immoral to sentence an individual to an existence of unending pain and/or suffering, their only escape being their “natural death” which could take years to arrive. Furthermore, a suicide is such a personal and intimate decision, and when chosen rationally, depends on a specific circumstance a person is in. An outside party with no measure of the suffering that person is experiencing really has no grounds to tell them what is morally…

    • 1075 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Harm Principle Definition

    • 307 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The Harm Principle requires less from us because it does not ask us to question the value we put on different aspects of life like the Best Interest Standard. There are eight conditions that have to be meet in order for the harm principle to justify state intervention, these are typically objective. The Best Interest Standard makes it difficult to define what’s in the “best interest of the child, it also questions whether greater value should be based on the servile rate of the child or the side effects, discomforts and disruptions that a child might go through. The fact that most of BIS standards are subjective makes it very difficult to determine what is best in a court of law.…

    • 307 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays