| Title |
Criminal Rehabilitation Through Medical Intervention: Moral Liability and the Right to Bodily Integrity
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Journal of Ethics, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10892-014-9161-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Thomas Douglas |
| Abstract |
Criminal offenders are sometimes required, by the institutions of criminal justice, to undergo medical interventions intended to promote rehabilitation. Ethical debate regarding this practice has largely proceeded on the assumption that medical interventions may only permissibly be administered to criminal offenders with their consent. In this article I challenge this assumption by suggesting that committing a crime might render one morally liable to certain forms of medical intervention. I then consider whether it is possible to respond persuasively to this challenge by invoking the right to bodily integrity. I argue that it is not. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 20% |
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 56 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 12% |
| Researcher | 5 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 19% |
| Unknown | 12 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Philosophy | 11 | 19% |
| Psychology | 9 | 16% |
| Arts and Humanities | 5 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 14 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 September 2022.
All research outputs
#3,718,315
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Ethics
#22
of 317 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,586
of 245,558 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Ethics
#1
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 317 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 245,558 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them