Abstract

Sider and Clements provide a critical response to my view that there is no independent obligation to seek one's own health. They then argue that such an obligation exists. They are incorrect in their characterisation of my view; their critical discussion of the view they erroneously attribute to me is unconvincing; the positive argument they offer for their own view is unsatisfactory; they misjudge the significance of what is at issue; and they conclude by affirming a position that lacks a due regard for the rights of patients.