Advertisement

Journal of Bioethical Inquiry

, Volume 16, Issue 3, pp 455–461 | Cite as

Enhanced Interrogation, Consequential Evaluation, and Human Rights to Health

  • Benedict S. B. ChanEmail author
Critical Response

Abstract

Balfe argues against enhanced interrogation. He particularly focuses on the involvement of U.S. healthcare professionals in enhanced interrogation. He identifies several empirical and normative factors and argues that they are not good reasons to morally justify enhanced interrogation. I argue that his argument can be improved by making two points. First, Balfe considers the reasoning of those healthcare professionals as utilitarian. However, careful consideration of their ideas reveals that their reasoning is consequential rather than utilitarian evaluation. Second, torture is a serious human rights abuse. When healthcare professionals become involved in enhanced interrogation, they violate not only human rights against torture but also human rights to health. Considering the consequential reasoning against human rights abuses, healthcare professionals’ involvement in enhanced interrogation is not morally justified. Supplementing Balfe’s position with these two points makes his argument more complete and convincing, and hence it can contribute to the way which shows that enhanced interrogation is not justified by consequential evaluation.

Keywords

Enhanced interrogation Torture Healthcare professionals Consequential evaluation Utilitarianism Human rights to health 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Dr. Isaac Chun-Hai Fung, Ms. Calista Lam and anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions to improve the quality of the paper.

Compliance with ethical standards

Disclaimer

Research related to this article has been funded by the Early Career Scheme from the University Grants Committee, Hong Kong S.A.R., China (No. 22611516) from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2019. The project title is “A Philosophical Investigation of the Ethics of Human Rights to Health.” This article does not represent the official positions of the University Grants Committee or Hong Kong S.A.R. Government.

References

  1. Allhoff, F. 2012. Terrorism, ticking time-bombs, and torture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Annas, G., and M. Grodin., eds. 1995. The Nazi doctors and the Nuremberg code. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Balfe, M. 2016. Why did U.S. healthcare professionals become involved in torture during the war on terror? Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 13(3): 449–460.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Chan, B.S.B. 2014. A human rights debate on physical security, political liberty, and the Confucian tradition. Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 13(4): 567–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chan, B.S.B. 2015. Do economic rights conflict with political rights? An east and west cultural debate. In Conflict and harmony in comparative philosophy, edited by A.B. Creller, 139-–147. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
  6. Chan, B.S.B. 2019a. East Asia: Challenges to political rights. In Routledge handbook of development ethics, edited by J. Drydyk and L. Keleher, 382-–386. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Chan, B.S.B. 2019b. Are international human rights universal? East-west philosophical debates on human rights to liberty and health. In Metaphysics of human rights 1948-2018: On the occasion of the 70th anniversary of the UDHR, edited by L. Di Donato and E. Grimi, 135-152. Malaga, Spain: Vernon Press.Google Scholar
  8. Daniels, N. 1985. Just health care. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Daniels, N. 2007. Just health. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Finnis, J. 2011. Natural law and natural rights, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Griffin, J. 2008. On human rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gordon, N. and R. Marton. 1995. Torture: Human rights, medical ethics and the case of Israel. London: Zed BooksGoogle Scholar
  13. Harris, S. 2002. Factories of death: Japanese biological warfare, 1932–1945 and the American cover-up, 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hausman, D. 2015a. The value of health. In The Oxford handbook of value theory, eds. I. Hirose and J. Olson, 338–355. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Hausman, D. 2015b. Valuing health: Well-being, freedom, and suffering. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Lazari-Radek, K., and P. Singer. 2014. The point of view of the universe: Sidgwick and contemporary ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lazari-Radek, K., and P. Singer. 2017. Utilitarianism: A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Li, X. 2006. Ethics, human rights and culture. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lifton, R. 1988. The Nazi doctors: Medical killing and the psychology of genocide. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  20. Lifton, R. 2004. Doctors and torture. New England Journal of Medicine 351(5): 415–416.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Luban, D. 2009. Unthinking the ticking bomb. In Global basic rights, edited by C. Beitz and R. Goodin, 181–206. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Macklin, R. 2007. Global health. In The Oxford handbook of bioethics, edited by B. Steinbock, 696–720. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Murphy, T., and P. Johnson. 2004. Torture and human rights. Virtual Mentor 6(9): 420–423.Google Scholar
  24. Nickel, J. 2007. Making sense of human rights, 2nd ed. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  25. Nozick, R. 1974. Anarchy, state, and utopia. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  26. Parfit, D. 1984. Reasons and persons. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  27. Reis, A., L. Amowitz, L. Kushner, A. Kushner, M. Elahi, and V. Lacopino. 2004. Physician participation in human rights abuse in southern Iraq. JAMA 291(12): 1480–1486.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Ruger, J. 2010. Health and social justice. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Scanlon, T. 1998. What we owe to each other. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Scheffler, S. 1994. The rejection of consequentialism, revised edition. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sen, A. 1979. Utilitarianism and welfarism. Journal of Philosophy 76(9): 463–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sen, A. 1982. Rights and agency. Philosophy and Public Affairs 11(1): 3–39.Google Scholar
  33. Sen, A. 1992. Inequality reexamined. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  34. Sen, A. 2000. Consequential evaluation and practical reason. The Journal of Philosophy 97(9): 477–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Shue, H. 1978. Torture. Philosophy & Public Affairs 7(2): 124–143.Google Scholar
  36. Shue, H. 1996. Basic rights: Subsistence, affluence, and U.S. foreign policy, 2nd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Shue, H. 2006. Torture in dreamland: Disposing of the ticking bomb. Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law 37(2/3): 231–239.Google Scholar
  38. Sinnott-Armstrong, W. 2015. Consequentialism. In The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2015/entries/consequentialism/. Accessed August 30, 2017.Google Scholar
  39. Talbott, W. 2010. Human rights and human well-being. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Walzer, M. 1987. Interpretation and social criticism: The Tanner lectures on human values 1985. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Walzer, M. 1994. Thick and thin: Moral argument at home and abroad. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Williams, B. 1973. A critique of utilitarianism. In Utilitarianism: For and against, edited by J.J.C. Smart and B. Williams, 77–150. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  43. United Nations. 1948. Universal declaration of human rights, General Assembly Resolution 217A (III). www.un.org/en/documents/udhr. Accessed August 30, 2017.
  44. United Nations. 1966a. International covenant on civil and political rights, General Assembly Resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CCPR.aspx. Accessed August 30, 2017.
  45. United Nations. 1966b. International covenant on economic, social and cultural rights, General Assembly Resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CESCR.aspx. Accessed August 30, 2017.
  46. United Nations. 1984. Convention against torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, General Assembly Resolution 39/46 of 10 December. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CAT.aspx. Accessed August 30, 2017.
  47. Venkatapuram, S. 2011. Health justice. Malden, MA: Polity.Google Scholar
  48. Wolff, J. 2011. The human rights to health. In Global health and global health ethics, edited by S. Benatar and G. Brock, 108–118. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wolff, J. 2012. The human rights to health. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  50. World Health Organization. 1946 /2006. Constitution. www.who.int/governance/eb/who_constitution_en.pdf. Accessed August 30, 2017.
  51. World Medical Association. 1975/2016. WMA Declaration of Tokyo—Guidelines for physicians concerning torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment in relation to detention and imprisonment. https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-tokyo-guidelines-for-physicians-concerning-torture-and-other-cruel-inhuman-or-degrading-treatment-or-punishment-in-relation-to-detention-and-imprisonment. Accessed August 16, 2018.

Copyright information

© Journal of Bioethical Inquiry Pty Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Religion and Philosophy, Centre of Applied EthicsHong Kong Baptist UniversityKowloonHong Kong

Personalised recommendations