IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v55y2002i8p1425-1434.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The instrumental uses of autonomy: A review of AIDS law and policy in Europe

Author

Listed:
  • Harrington, John A

Abstract

This paper reviews the changing role of the ethical value of autonomy in law and policy relating to AIDS in a number of European jurisdictions. In the early years of the epidemic the autonomy of infected and at-risk persons, and of social groups was promoted as a means of reducing the spread of HIV in the general population. Accordingly, autonomy was deemed worthy of respect for instrumental reasons. This means-end calculation was premised on the lack of medical therapies, as well as the need to avoid discrimination in order to prevent at-risk persons from "going underground". In law, this instrumentalisation of autonomy was reflected in a specific application of the proportionality test applied in administrative and human rights law, that is, imposing coercive or discriminatory measures would be disproportionate, or even inimical, to the goal of reducing the spread of HIV. This was a contingent analysis, strongly informed by the state of medical knowledge at the time, as well as by the relative power of professionals, health bureaucrats and lay activists. With the introduction of effective therapies such as the Highly Active Retroviral Therapy and Zidovudine, the terms of the proportionality analysis have changed decisively. As a result, it is now more likely than before that coercive measures will be implemented.

Suggested Citation

  • Harrington, John A, 2002. "The instrumental uses of autonomy: A review of AIDS law and policy in Europe," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 55(8), pages 1425-1434, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:55:y:2002:i:8:p:1425-1434
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(01)00270-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:55:y:2002:i:8:p:1425-1434. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.