Skip to main content
Log in

Is `Property' Necessary? On Owning the Human Body and its Parts

  • Published:
Res Publica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Courts usually treat control over human bodies and body parts as a property issue and find that people do not have property rights in themselves. This contradicts the liberal philosophical principle that people should be able to perform any self-regarding actions that do not cause harm to others. The philosophical inconsistencies under pinning the legal treatment of body parts arguably stem from a misplaced judicial preoccupation with‘property’. A better approach would be to hold a policy inquiry into the degree of liberty a society wishes to grant its inhabitants. Only once this substantive issue has been addressed should property be raised as a possible method of implementing the policy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

George, A. Is `Property' Necessary? On Owning the Human Body and its Parts. Res Publica 10, 15–42 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:RESP.0000018186.87396.fc

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:RESP.0000018186.87396.fc

Navigation