Article Text
Public health ethics
Paper
Snakes and ladders: state interventions and the place of liberty in public health policy
Abstract
In this paper I outline and explore some problems in the way that the Nuffield Council of Bioethics’ report Public Health: Ethical Issues (2007) presents its ‘Intervention Ladder’. They see the metaphor of a ladder both as capturing key normative priorities and as making a real and important contribution to ethical policymaking in public health. In this paper I argue that the intervention ladder is not a useful model for thinking about policy decisions, that it is likely to produce poor decisions and that it is incompatible with the report's stated approach to relevant public health policy values.
- Public Health Ethics
- Public Policy
- Law
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Linked Articles
- The concise argument
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Playing twister on the stairs: in defence of public health
- Ladders and stairs: how the intervention ladder focuses blame on individuals and obscures systemic failings and interventions
- The intervention ladder and the ethical appraisal of systemic public health interventions
- Health law and policy: The scope and bounds of liberty?
- Introduction: Special Issue on the Ethics of Incentives in Healthcare
- Spoonful of honey or a gallon of vinegar? A conditional COVID-19 vaccination policy for front-line healthcare workers
- Salvaging the concept of nudge
- Informed consent in cluster randomised trials: new and common ethical challenges
- Obesity, paternalism and fairness
- Norms, rules and policy tools: understanding Article 5.3 as an instrument of tobacco control governance