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.
Similar content being viewed by others
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights 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
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:RESP.0000018186.87396.fc