How should the state respond to people who commit low‐level criminal offenses that stem from an untreated substance‐use disorder? The issue has taken on a heightened importance amidst an ongoing national addiction crisis that has destabilized many U.S. communities and led to a myriad of harms. I offer a qualified defense for the use of legal mandates that require participation in drug treatment in lieu of jail time as one possible tool for reducing the public harms associated with chronic (...) addiction. I argue that mandated treatment is effective, though less effective than many proponents argue. Beyond the effectiveness question, opponents contend that mandated treatment exacerbates structural inequalities, including the overpolicing of marginalized communities and underinvestment in voluntary treatment. Drawing on an egalitarian theory of justice, I argue that these structural inequalities present a compelling reason to constrain the use of mandates, but that they should be counterbalanced by a mixture of paternalistic and public safety concerns that make mandates one of several instruments in drug policy for addressing the pervasive harms from severe substance‐use disorders. (shrink)

Political communities across the world have recently sought to tackle rising rates of vaccine hesitancy and refusal, by implementing coercive immunization programs, or by making existing immunization programs more coercive. Many academics and advocates of public health have applauded these policy developments, and they have invoked ethical reasons for implementing or strengthening vaccine mandates. Others have criticized these policies on ethical grounds, for undermining liberty, and as symptoms of broader government overreach. But such arguments often obscure or abstract away (...) from the diverse values that are relevant to the ethical justifications of particular political communities’ vaccine‐mandate policies. We argue for an expansive conception of the normative issues relevant to deciding whether and how to establish or reform vaccine mandates, and we propose a schema by which to organize our thoughts about the ways in which different kinds of vaccine‐mandate policies implicate various values. (shrink)

ABSTRACT In this paper I focus on a subset of experiences in which action-properties are presented—namely, those in which objects in our perceptual surroundings or environment ‘demand’ that certain actions be carried out, as experienced mandates (EMs). The critical part of the paper argues that a complex contents view, which builds all of the distinctiveness of such experiences into their perceptual content, is unsatisfactory. As an alternative, I argue that EMs involve bodily potentiation, which is best understood in terms (...) of felt action readiness. I then outline a hybrid account, which combines content-based features of EMs with action-readiness. (shrink)

Smith and Mackie offer a conditional defence of vaccine mandates.1 Their argument is conditional, because it is based on Kiener’s interpersonal consenter-consentee account of consent.2 (Smith and Mackie do not defend this account of consent.) According to Kiener, whether an influence undermines consent depends not only on its effects, but on who exerts it (p372).2 If A coerces B, this would invalidate consent that B gives to A, but it does not invalidate consent that B gives to C. The (...) fact of A’s coercion is irrelevant to the consent relationship between B and C, because A is a third party. Thus, a physician (consent-receiver) still acts permissibly when vaccinating a patient (consent-giver), even if the patient’s consent was involuntary because of some third-party mandate. One worry about this argument is whether the physician is sufficiently distanced from the coercion. Kiener notes that the patient’s consent …. (shrink)

This article argues that the February 2026 referendum conferred a democratic mandate for constitutional reform but not unlimited authority for institutional redesign. Critiquing claims that the referendum authorised a Constitution Reform Assembly through constituent power, it distinguishes political rupture from constitutional refounding and argues that democratic mandates must be interpreted according to the procedures, wording, and institutional framework through which they arise. Constitutional reform gains enduring legitimacy only when implementation remains faithful to the scope of the authority explicitly authorised (...) by the electorate. (shrink)

In this study, we examine investor and firm response to the California Transparency in Supply Chains Act of 2010. The CTSCA requires large retail and manufacturing firms to disclose efforts to eradicate slavery and human trafficking from their supply chains and is a rare example of mandated corporate social responsibility disclosure. Based on a sample of 105 retail companies subject to the CTSCA, we find a significant negative market reaction to the passing of the CTSCA. Furthermore, we find that the (...) reaction is significantly more negative for larger firms and companies facing greater supply chain risks, suggesting that investors place a negative value on exposure to legitimacy threats in the social domain. With respect to company disclosure response, we document relatively high compliance with the legislation, although we also find that the disclosure response appeared to be more symbolic than substantive in nature. Finally, our analysis indicates that both disclosure choice and disclosure extensiveness were significantly higher for the high-supply chain risk companies, suggesting that the response was influenced by concerns with strategic legitimation. Overall, the limited quality of disclosure suggests that, without additional rules and guidance, mandates alone may not lead to meaningful social disclosure. (shrink)

A proposed state administrative rule would have required medical ethicists to approve certain aspects of gender-affirming care. The authors argue the proposed rule lacked appropriate justification compared to other instances of state-mandated ethics oversight and would undermine trust, raise practical challenges, and send harmful messages to society, patients, and providers.

A number of recent legal cases in the United States have considered both disability‐based exceptions to Covid‐19‐related mask mandates and disability‐based claims to stronger masking rules in states restricting the abilities of local governments to enforce mask mandates. We argue that a proper legal and ethical analysis of such cases requires understanding the distinction between disability accommodations and disability modifications. Disability accommodations are individualized adjustments that enable qualified individuals to perform jobs or achieve access on terms comparable to (...) those experienced by others. Disability modifications are programmatic changes to structures or policies that increase accessibility. We contend that in the context of mask mandates, modifications rather than accommodations are ethically desirable because modification‐oriented policies promote disability access in a way that treats all individuals fairly, avoiding the risk of promoting misinformation and uncertainty about the health benefits of masking. (shrink)

We provide ethical criteria to establish when vaccine mandates for healthcare workers are ethically justifiable. The relevant criteria are the utility of the vaccine for healthcare workers, the utility for patients (both in terms of prevention of transmission of infection and reduction in staff shortage), and the existence of less restrictive alternatives that can achieve comparable benefits. Healthcare workers have professional obligations to promote the interests of patients that entail exposure to greater risks or infringement of autonomy than ordinary (...) members of the public. Thus, we argue that when vaccine mandates are justified on the basis of these criteria, they are not unfairly discriminatory and the level of coercion they involve is ethically acceptable—and indeed comparable to that already accepted in healthcare employment contracts. Such mandates might be justified even when general population mandates are not. Our conclusion is that, given current evidence, those ethical criteria justify mandates for influenza vaccination, but not COVID-19 vaccination, for healthcare workers. We extend our arguments to other vaccines. (shrink)

Employment-based vaccine mandates have worse consequences for existing than prospective employees. Prospective employees are not yet dependent on a particular employment arrangement, so they are better positioned to respond to such mandates. Yet despite this asymmetry in consequences, Smith argues that if vaccine mandates are justified for prospective employees, they are similarly justified for existing employees. This paper responds to Smith’s argument. First, Smith holds that bona fide occupational requirements are actions that are necessary for the safe (...) and effective completion of one’s job. As such, they apply to existing and prospective employees alike. However, I argue that the existence of effective alternative interventions precludes vaccination from being considered a bona fide occupational requirement under current circumstances. Second, Smith holds that if a requirement is justified for prospective employees, it is justified for existing employees, despite the asymmetry in consequences. However, I argue that since vaccination is not a bona fide requirement, the asymmetry in the harms of mandates experienced by prospective versus existing employees entails an asymmetry in the justification required to mandate vaccination for each group. As such, vaccination can be considered a requirement for prospective employees while not being required for existing employees. (shrink)

In this same, May‐June 2026, issue of the Hastings Center Report, Brendon Saloner suggests that mandated drug treatment can expand freedom and promote egalitarian social justice so long as three criteria are met. Drawing on our clinical experience in addiction medicine and a critical appraisal of the available evidence, we challenge this claim. We argue that Saloner's three criteria are unlikely to be met within jurisdictions that criminalize drug use and lack supports for people who use drugs. The criterion that (...) mandated treatment be “likely to be beneficial” is undermined by the coercive nature of such interventions and the lack of evidence supporting their effectiveness when compared to voluntary care. Further, the application of mandated treatment risks extending carceral oversight to individuals charged with minor offenses, disproportionately affecting equity‐denied populations. Finally, we question whether infringements on liberty through legal oversight can genuinely expand freedom, particularly when such measures exacerbate social instability and undermine the potential for voluntary engagement with care. We contend that meaningful expansion of freedom for people who use drugs is better achieved through voluntary, community‐based treatment models supported by robust social infrastructure. A radical reorientation of drug policy—away from coercion and toward supportive, person‐centered care—is necessary to achieve the ethical aims of reducing harm, promoting autonomy, and advancing egalitarian social justice. (shrink)

Presumed consent to organ donation looks increasingly unlikely to be a palatable option for increasing organ procurement in the UK following the publication of the report into events at Alder Hey and elsewhere. Yet, given that the alternative to increasing the number of cadaveric organs available is either to accept a greater number of live donations, or accept that people will continue to die for the want of an organ, public policy makers remain obliged to consider other means of increasing (...) the procurement rate.In this paper, we meet the main objections to mandated choice . We have modified the traditional approach to mandated choice to take into account the force of the objection that mandated donation is preferable, by accepting that people can and do make bad decisions about organ donation and proposing that all accompanying public education and information about cadaveric donation should be directed in favour of donation. (shrink)

A short piece exploring some arguments for mandating vaccination for Covid-19.

Vaccine mandates are coercive because they impose penalties, such as fines, criminal sanctions, or job loss. However, they are not as coercive as physical force. Mandates c...

Context In response to outbreaks of vaccine‐preventable disease and increasing rates of vaccine refusal, some political communities have recently implemented coercive childhood immunization programs, or they have made existing childhood immunization programs more coercive. Many other political communities possess coercive vaccination policies, and others are considering developing them. Scholars and policymakers generally refer to coercive immunization policies as “vaccine mandates.” However, mandatory vaccination is not a unitary concept. Rather, coercive childhood immunization policies are complex, context‐specific instruments. Their legally and (...) morally significant features often differ, and they are imposed by political communities in varying circumstances and upon diverse populations. Methods In this paper, we introduce a taxonomy for classifying real‐world and theoretical mandatory childhood vaccination policies, according to their scope (which vaccines to require), sanctions and severity (which kind of penalty to impose on vaccine refusers, and how much of that penalty to impose), and selectivity (how to enforce or exempt people from vaccine mandates). Findings A full understanding of the operation of a vaccine mandate policy (real or potential) requires attention to the separate components of that policy. However, we can synthesize information about a policy's scope, sanctions, severity, and selectivity to identify a further attribute—salience —which identifies the magnitude of the burdens the state imposes on those who are not vaccinated. Conclusion Our taxonomy provides a framework for forensic examination of current and potential mandatory vaccination policies, by focusing attention on those features of vaccine mandates that are most relevant for comparative judgments. (shrink)

Influenza mandates in health care institutions are recommended by professional associations as an effective way to prevent the contraction of influenza by patients from health care workers. Health care institutions with such mandates must operate within civil rights frameworks. A recent set of cases against health care institutions with influenza mandates reveals the liabilities posed by federal law that protects employees from religious discrimination. This article examines this legal framework and draws important lessons from this litigation for (...) health care institutions. We argue counterintuitively that providing religious exemptions from influenza mandates may expose health care institutions to more liability than not providing a formal exemption. (shrink)

Recent arguments over whether certain public health interventions should be mandatory raise questions about what counts as a "mandate." A mandate is not the same as a mere recommendation or the standard of practice. At minimum, a mandate should require an active opt-out and there should be some penalty for refusing to abide by it. Over-loose use of the term "mandate" and the easing of opt-out provisions could eventually pose a risk to the gains that truly mandatory public health interventions, (...) such as childhood vaccines, have provided over the last 50 years. Already, confusion about what counts as a mandate, and about what criteria should be used to determine when a public health intervention should be implemented as a mandate, has led to some inappropriate public policy decisions. For instance, by any reasonable criteria, the yearly influenza vaccine should be mandatory for health care workers. To enforce this mandate, those who refuse vaccination should be required to sign a waiver, and patients - especially those at high risk from flu - should be informed when they receive care from unvaccinated practitioners. (shrink)

This article argues that the Supreme Court should not require a religious exemption from vaccine mandates. For children, who cannot yet make autonomous religious decision, religious exemptions would allow parents to make a choice that puts the child at risk and makes the shared environment of the school unsafe — risking other people’s children. For adults, there are still good reasons not to require a religious exemption, since vaccines mandates are adopted for public health reasons, not to target (...) religion, are an area where free riding is a real risk, no religion actually prohibits vaccinating under a mandate, and policing religious exemptions is very difficult. (shrink)

Thousands of facilities worldwide have certified to International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14001, the international environmental management system standard, and previous research typically has studied these certification decisions at the facility level. However, significant anecdotal evidence indicates that firms may have a strong role, and if so, prior studies may be drawing inappropriate conclusions about the rationale for ISO 14001 certification. Drawing on institutional theory and the resource-based view of the firm, this study offers a conceptual framework that explains why (...) parent companies would mandate—rather than simply encourage—their operational units to certify to ISO 14001. The framework is tested using survey data of corporate environmental managers. The results show that firms have a central role in nearly half of all facility-level certifications and that firms that mandate ISO 14001 endure greater external pressures and have stronger complementary resources and capabilities that support their organization-wide ISO 14001 policies. (shrink)

Can mandated adoption of corporate social responsibility (CSR) improve firm value? Most CSR adoption is purely voluntary. However, governments regularly encourage CSR adoption with soft regulations that vary from simply endorsing and symbolically supporting CSR to requiring the adoption of specific practices. Governments have resisted fully mandating CSR because there is some concern universally that mandated CSR may reduce firm value. There is, however, no empirical clarity as to whether mandated CSR impedes or improves firm value. We address this uncertainty (...) by analyzing the effects of the mandated adoption of CSR that the government of India legislated in 2014. Drawing on a sample of 1,526 publicly traded firms and deploying a combinative analytical framework comprising an event study, regression discontinuity design, and a difference-in-differences technique, we conclude that India’s CSR mandate did, in fact, increase value for all firms bound by the mandate. This value-enhancing effect was greater for foreign firms relative to domestic firms. Our results refute previous research showing that India’s CSR mandate diminished firm value. (shrink)

Democratic theorists have developed a rich literature exploring why winning democratic elections gives representatives the moral right to occupy public office. However, they have largely ignored the question of whether receiving greater or lesser voter support ever makes a moral difference to how representatives ought to govern. In this essay, I defend the existence of mandate reasons for representatives to govern in specific ways that are derived solely from voter support. I argue that the relationship between votes and mandate reasons (...) is characterised by the dependence thesis, which says that votes strengthen representatives’ mandate reasons to govern in specific ways when and only when voters express supportive attitudes for governing in those ways. Because not every vote for a representative expresses the relevant kind of support for their proposals, not every vote strengthens their mandate reasons. This has important implications for the ethics of representation. (shrink)

In Confucius' time, it was supposed that the sovereign had the mandate of heaven (tianming) to rule. Both Confucius and Mencius speak of a legitimate ruler as someone who has such a mandate and of a deposed ruler as someone who has lost it. Commentators have recently turned their attention to what the reference to the mandate of heaven means, as there are implications for the prospects of democracy in a Confucian state. The result is a wide spectrum of views. (...) In what might be called the liberal interpretation of the "mandate of heaven," Confucianism, or Mencius more specifically, allows for a popular revolt against a despotic ruler (hence for the possibility of democracy). In what might be called the conservative .. (shrink)

The rapid development and roll-out of COVID-19 vaccines has been a surprising success of the pandemic and has likely saved hundreds of thousands of lives. Although most people were eager to receive a vaccine, many jurisdictions introduced mandates to ensure rapid uptake in the population, especially among key workers including healthcare workers. In some instances, individuals who can prove they have recovered from COVID-19 have been exempt from vaccine mandates, but in other cases such exemptions have not been (...) made. Pugh et al argue that such exemptions for those already immune ought to be included in COVID-19 vaccine mandates.1 They review the evidence on infection-induced and vaccine-induced immunity and show that that there is not evidence that vaccines offer better protection against severe COVID-19 or of SARS-CoV-2 infection. They argue that to treat people differently based on the source of their COVID-19 immunity is wrongful discrimination, with this discrimination bringing harms in the form of unjust restriction of liberty and negative consequences such as lost employment. I agree with Pugh et al ’s view that, given the available evidence, infection-induced immunity to SARS-CoV-2 ought to be treated as equivalent to vaccine-induced immunity for the purposes of most COVID-19 vaccine mandates. However, their article highlights the need for clarity in the rationale for mandates. This clarity is necessary to be able to identify when exemptions are appropriate. It may be the case that in some instances infection-induced immunity ought not to be grounds for exemption. Pugh et al ’s argument also suggests that collection of data on infection-induced immunity may be a requirement for ethical vaccine mandates. To be confident in such exemptions, we need evidence that infection-induced immunity is comparable to vaccine-induced immunity in the …. (shrink)

Informed by Critical Race Theory, this quantitative study supports civic educators in understanding the role of classroom climate and racial identity in students’ civic engagement during a statewide middle school civics mandate (n = 4707). Findings reveal that students of color experience higher civic engagement and lower civic attitude scores than white-identifying peers, after controlling for school, classroom, and affluence indicators. Students’ perception of whiteness (or perhaps majority status) appeared to correlate with positive civic knowledge and civic attitude, but relative (...) civic inaction. These findings suggest differences in civic outcomes as early as middle school between white-identifying students and students of color. Such differences offer implications for civic education interventions that address not only effective instruction, but civic inequities, students’ perceived agency, and curricular content. (shrink)

I critically examine a common liberal egalitarian view about the justification for, and proper content of, mandatory health insurance. This view holds that a mandate is justified because it is the best way to ensure that those in poor health gain health insurance on equitable terms. It also holds that a government should mandate what a representative prudent individual would purchase for themselves if they were placed in fair conditions of choice. I argue that this common justification for a mandate (...) is incomplete. A further reason for mandated insurance is that it helps secure social egalitarian public goods that would be underprovided if insurance were optional. I also argue that rather than mandating what a representative individual would choose for themselves, we should design the mandatory package by appealing to a pluralistic egalitarian view, which cares about improving people’s well-being, reducing unfair inequality, and maintaining egalitarian social relations. (shrink)

Background: Mental health professionals working in correctional contexts engage a double role to care and control. This dual loyalty conflict has repeatedly been criticized to impede the development of a high-quality alliance. As therapeutic alliance is a robust predictor of outcome measures of psychotherapy, it is essential to investigate the effects of this ethical dilemma. Methods: This qualitative interview study investigates patients’ perceptions of their therapists’ dual role conflict in court-mandated treatment settings. We interviewed 41 older incarcerated persons using a (...) semi-structured interview guide, the interviews were subsequently analyzed following thematic analysis. Results: We first present the patients’ perceptions of their treating psychotherapist’s dual loyalty conflict, which was linked to their overall treatment experience. In a second step, we outline the study participants’ reasons for this judgment, which were most commonly linked to feelings of trust or betrayal. More specifically, they named certain therapist characteristics and activities that enabled them to develop a trustful therapeutic alliance, which we grouped into four topics: respecting the patient’s pace and perceived coercion; patient health needs to be first priority; clarity in roles and responsibilities; and the art of communication – between transparency and unchecked information sharing. Discussion: Developing a high quality alliance in mandatory offender treatment is central due to its relationship with recovery and desistance. Our findings show that some therapists’ characteristics and activities attenuate the negative impact of their double role on the development and maintenance of the alliance. To increase the effectiveness of court-mandated treatments, we need to support clinicians in dealing with their dual role to allow the formation of a high quality therapeutic alliance. Our qualitative interview study contributed to this much-needed empirical research on therapist’ characteristics promoting a trustful relationship in correctional settings. (shrink)

This article argues that the 2026 constitutional referendum conferred a powerful but limited democratic mandate rather than unlimited constituent authority. By distinguishing derivative authority from constitution-founding power, it contends that referendum legitimacy is constrained by the scope of the question presented to voters. Democratic reform, therefore, requires faithful implementation within the authorised framework rather than expansive reinterpretation that exceeds the mandate granted by the electorate.

This content analysis examines the ways that genocide is included in the high school world history content standards of eleven states with legislative mandates requiring genocide education, as well as if the content standards in those states differ from those of states without mandated genocide education. The null curriculum theorizes that the content that is not taught may be as important as what is taught; this lens allows for a nuanced analysis of the ways that genocide is included and (...) excluded in state standards. The findings suggest that states with legislative mandates requiring genocide education do not necessarily have high school world history content standards that require genocide education. The content standards in states with legislative mandates often omit acts of genocide, refrain from using the term “genocide,” and frame genocides as less important than the Holocaust, perpetuating the null curriculum of genocides. (shrink)

Perhaps the most contentious part of the response to the Covid-19 pandemic has been the decision by governments to mandate—or effectively mandate—the shutdown of certain businesses. The justification for doing so is broadly consequentialist. The public health costs of not shutting down are so great that potential benefits from allowing businesses to open are dwarfed. Operating within this consequentialist framework, this paper identifies an underappreciated set of social costs that are a product of the present public policy that pairs mandated (...) shutdowns with government subsidies. Such policy is prone to being an instance of what Robert Higgs calls the ratchet effect. Given that ratchets tend to be both costly and sticky, it is best to avoid allowing them to come into existence. This paper identifies a way of circumventing this particular ratchet; namely, by replacing governmental subsidies with support from private charitable funds like The Barstool Fund. (shrink)

The magic word in Clinton's campaign had been "Change," a reorientation of policy toward the needs of the great majority of the population who had suffered from Reagan-Bush "trickle down" economics -- in practice, an upward flood -- and had swept Clinton into office on the promise of an end to the party for the rich. But it would be unfair to speak unkindly of the newly-elected President for clarifying at once that the fine words of the campaign were not (...) intended seriously, that the "Mandate for Change" proclaimed by a Clinton think tank meant "Business as Usual," as it did when Eisenhower's PR team coined the phrase. "Campaign pledges [are] made to be broken," Harvard political scientist and media specialist Marty Linsky explained when President Bush called for "revenue enhancement" after winning the 1988 election with a pledge not to raise taxes. To accuse Bush of violating his campaign pledge was a "political cheap shot." When he led the public in his "read my lips -- no new taxes" chant, Bush had merely been expressing his "world view," making "a statement of his hopes." The same precepts hold for his successor. (shrink)

This paper examines the economic rationale of affordability exemptions in the context of a health insurance mandate. I provide an economic definition of affordability and discuss how it is implemented in the contexts of food, housing, and health care. Affordability standards are frequently used in making food and housing policy, but both empirically and theoretically health care operates quite differently than these other merit goods. This helps explain why the use of affordability in health policymaking is so different from its (...) use in these other contexts. I conclude with some suggestions about how to improve affordability exemption rules in health policymaking. (shrink)

The aim of this book is to re-establish the concept of 'law' in Christian ethics without at the same time sacrificing any of the gains in moral freedom that have come from the concept of situation ethics. Michael Keeling argues that there is a common human search for morality in which the specific contribution of Christians is the idea of freedom as the primary gift of God to human beings. However, within this freedom it should be possible to define certain (...) guidelines or 'mandates' which correspond both to the divine life revealed in Jesus Christ and to the human realities described by the natural and the social sciences. (shrink)

In his Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life, Ted Porter asks how to account for the prestige and power of quantitative methods in the modern world. His answer involves two theses. One reverses a standard claim by asserting that quantification in basic sciences can often be driven by quantification in more applied areas such as government and business. The second thesis, which I call judgment replacement, asserts that quantification overcomes lack of trust in humans (...) by replacing human judgment in scientific communities and public life. Some aspects of the latter thesis are insightful and convincing. However, as a general claim, the judgment replacement thesis says that quantification and objectivity imply shallowness, superficiality and lack of subtlety. I examine one of Porter's key examples and show that as a general proposition the judgment replacement thesis gives a warped account of governmental decisions that involve a great deal of scientific input, an activity that colleagues and I have called mandated science. I show that Porter obfuscates the very features of mandated science that need the most clarification. The quantitative mentality can be superficial but it can also be complex and profound, and quantification can actually increase human judgment. The virtues of quantitative methods help account for their prestige and power. (shrink)

This book examines the Indian mandate for Corporate Social Responsibility and its implementations in various individual organizations. Although the mandate is applicable only to certain large and stable companies, many believe that India is poised to become the birthplace of social, economic and environmental transformation, given the immense size of the Indian population and its challenging socio-economic index. The book explores the various facets of CSR investigation and places special emphasis on the Schedule VII of the Indian Companies Act of (...) 2013, which defines specific areas of intervention for these companies. In addition, it provides a wealth of first-hand case studies that exemplify the ongoing developments and the fundamental challenges and opportunities of mandated CSR. (shrink)

The author casts a retrospective glance at the stations of the fifty years old discussion about the mandate of ecumenical deacony. Today two basic conceptions are marked off: the conception of a prophetic deacony, informed by the leading notion of »justice« on one side, and the conception of a caritative deacony, informed by the leading notion of »reconciliation« on the other. The author discusses the tention between these concepts in their theological foundations and takes a look at the significance of (...) these concepts in situations characterized by »complex emergencies«. Therefore he explores criterions and standards, on which the mandate of ecumenical deacony could be orientated for the future. (shrink)

Stoltenberg, G. Freies und imperatives Mandat.--Kaltefleiter, W. und Veen, H.-J. Von der Demokratie zur Delegiertenherrschaft.--Bromme, P. Meinungsfreiheit in der parlamentarischen Demokratie.

Seat belt mandates seem like a paradigmatic case of justified paternalism. Even those who generally object to paternalism often concede that seat belt laws are justified. Against this near-consensus in favor of mandates, I argue that seat belt laws are unjust and public officials should not enforce them. The most plausible exceptions to a principle of anti-paternalism do not justify seat belt mandates. Some argue that seat belt mandates are not paternalistic because unbelted riders are not (...) fully autonomous. Others claim that the decision to ride unbelted harms other people. Yet these attempts to defend seat belt mandates on non-paternalistic grounds cannot overcome the case against seat belt mandates. I therefore conclude that even seat belt mandates are unjust. With this comprehensive case against seat belt mandates, I demonstrate the more general difficulties in justifying any form of coercive paternalism. (shrink)

An ethical and legal obligation generally exists for informed consent to be obtained prior to the administration of medical interventions. This includes vaccinations. For an individual’s informed consent to be valid, it must be given voluntarily. Hence, when individuals are required to be vaccinated—for example, as a condition of employment—we might ask whether this impairs the voluntariness of their informed consent, thereby rendering it invalid. If this turns out to be the case, then this would count as a pro tanto (...) reason to think vaccine mandates are unethical. Assuming vaccine mandates count as ‘coercive’, interrogating this question requires an account of consent under third-party coercion, since the pressure or coercion exerted by vaccine mandates is exerted by third parties, such as employers, rather than the recipients of consent. Accordingly, this paper draws on Maximilian Kiener’s Interpersonal Consenter–Consentee Justification account of the voluntariness of medical consent under third-party coercion to develop an explicit argument as to why vaccine mandates do not vitiate the voluntariness of informed consent. Vaccine mandates do not necessarily impair the voluntariness of informed consent because, in such cases, the consent-receiver neither contributes to a vaccine mandate’s coercive threat nor wrongs the consent-giver in any way. Consent is not obtained by coercion in such cases, even though it may be motivated by it. The mere presence of third-party coercion does not invalidate consent since third parties cannot directly negate the voluntariness of consent. (shrink)

Vaccine mandates are diverse policy instruments that impact people differently. This paper explores how different types of mandates may generate distinct subjective experiences of constraint, compulsion, or power across populations. We identify and analyze five key aspects of mandate policies that influence these experiences – (1) the alignment between individual preferences and mandate requirements, (2) the relationship between parents’ and children’s interests, (3) the experienced severity of sanctions, (4) the availability of reasonable alternatives, and (5) the power that (...) the enforcing authority actually applies to particular persons – which are crucial for assessing mandates’ effectiveness, identifying which populations are most affected, anticipating public responses, and informing ethical justifications. We remain neutral about whether these experiences constitute coercion, but we emphasize that these experiences may have ethical significance regardless of how they are categorized. This paper provides a foundation for future normative work by clarifying some of the complex landscape of vaccine mandate policies and their impacts, without explicitly defending a particular theory of coercion or public health justice. (shrink)

A number of authors criticise opt-out (or ‘deemed consent’) systems for failing to secure valid consent to organ donation. Further, several suggest that mandated choice offers a more ethical alternative. This article responds to criticisms that opt-out does not secure informed consent. If we assume current (low) levels of public awareness, then the explicit consent secured under mandated choice will not be informed either. Conversely, a mandated choice policy might be justifiable if accompanied by a significant public education campaign. However, (...) if this entitles us to assume that members of the public are informed, then an opt-out system would also be justified in the same circumstances. The alleged advantages of mandated choice seem to rest on an unfair comparison, between mandated choice with a public education campaign and an opt-out system without one. While it may be that some countries with opt-out systems should do more to inform their publics, I see no reason to assume that this cannot be done. Indeed, advocates of mandated choice seem committed to thinking it possible to raise awareness. If opt-out systems adopt the same methods, such as writing to every individual, this should also address concerns about whether consent is informed. (shrink)

Confucian thinkers seem to have had something like our present concept of empathy long before that notion was self-consciously available in the West. Wang Yang-Ming’s talk of forming one body with others and similar ideas in the writings of Cheng Hao and, much earlier, of Mengzi make it clear that the Confucian traditions not only had the idea of empathy but saw its essential relation to phenomena like compassion, benevolence, and sympathy that are constitutive of the altruistic side of morality. (...) Nowadays, there is increasing interest among Western psychologists and philosophers in the phenomenon of empathy, and it would be lovely and welcome if, having originated these ideas, Chinese philosophers would now take up and help develop what has recently been said and done about empathy, and its relation to altruism, in the West. (shrink)

After almost a year and a half of the COVID-19 pandemic, many healthcare institutions in the United States announced that they would mandate COVID-19 vaccination, with medical and religious exceptions, as a term of employment. The mandates resulted in widely publicized protests from hospital staff, including some nurses, who argued that these medical institutions violated the ethical principle of autonomy. As the world enters the “post-pandemic period,” decisions such as these, made during times of crisis, must be reviewed to (...) provide clarity for when the next pandemic occurs. In this paper, we support the argument that such mandates are ethically justifiable. We explore the framework of objections that were brought forward by dissenters of this vaccine mandate. Next, we provide an analysis of conflicting ethical principles present when such mandates were deployed. Utilizing the American Nurses Association’s Code of Ethics for Nurses, notably provisions 2, 3, and 6 we argue that it is an ethical duty of the nurse to be vaccinated. Specifically, we turn to provision two, which most explicitly underscores the necessity of vaccination as a function of the nurse’s primary commitment to the patient. Next, we highlight the International Council of Nurses Code of Ethics which provides similar guidance internationally. Finally, we examine the applicability of the principles of public health, care ethics, and the nursing role as frameworks to underpin such mandates both for the current and for potential future pandemics, arguing that the nurse’s ethical duty to be vaccinated spans these contexts. (shrink)

In this essay, we discuss the results of scientific dogmatism and the backlash it has created in society. We cite various examples from the pandemic to highlight our case. We argue that dogmatism will ultimately put the scientific paradigm in crisis and a different approach is needed to address populism. We further argue science is more digestible when emotional faculties of individuals are considered first. We use a philosophical approach to also describe the dangers of dogmatism and the interplay between (...) technocracy and populism. (shrink)

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are a uniquely situated population within the governance of public health. They are operating as implementation agents and are subject to state regulation. This study comparatively examines COVID-19 vaccination mandates for HCWs across four governance models: Saudi Arabia’s religio-state hybrid, France’s republican-paternal framework, the United States’ neoliberal employer-based system, and South Africa’s Ubuntu-informed communitarian approach. Using qualitative comparative methods combining policy archaeology and critical discourse analysis within an ethical-weighting framework, the study finds that mandate effectiveness depended (...) less on coercion than on culturally resonant justificatory narratives. Concepts such as maslaha in Saudi Arabia and civic solidarity in France supported compliance, whereas extensive autonomy protections in the United States produced uneven adherence, in contrast to how historical mistrust weakened civic appeals in South Africa. These findings underscore the ethical and practical importance of culturally grounded, equity-sensitive mandate design in strengthening pandemic preparedness and response. (shrink)

The proposal to create a chamber selected by sortition would extend this democratic procedure into the legislative branch of government. However, there are good reasons to believe that, as currently conceived by John Gastil and Erik Olin Wright, the proposal will fail to realize sufficiently two fundamental democratic goods, namely, political equality and deliberative reasoning. It is argued through analysis of its historic and contemporary application that sortition must be combined with other institutional devices, in particular, rotation of membership and (...) limited mandate, in order to be democratically effective and to realize political equality and deliberative reasoning. An alternative proposal for a responsive sortition legislature is presented as more realistic and utopian: one that increases substantially the number of members, makes more extensive use of internal sortition and rotation, and recognizes the importance of establishing limited mandates. (shrink)

One of the most puzzling problems in Confucianism is how to justify hereditary kingship in Confucian terms. This paper investigates this puzzle—the succession of the Mandate of Heaven—by focusing on Byeon Gyeryang (1369–1430), a Korean Neo-Confucian thinker who grappled with the question of political authority and legitimacy in the formative stage of the Joseon dynasty (1392–1910). It argues that Byeon advocated the “ownership conception” of political authority as an essential condition for the ruler’s effective and responsible service for the well-being (...) of the people, with special attention to the critical importance of “consolidating” a new dynasty. Byeon believed that the ruler’s sense of ownership of the land and the people strongly motivates him to repossess the Mandate of Heaven, further leading him to develop an extensive sense of responsibility for the well-being of the people, which, in turn, drives him to become virtuous, thereby deserving Heaven’s blessings. (shrink)

Under resource dependence theory, firms should benefit from diverse boards of directors. Ethical arguments also highlight that boards should be as diverse as the stakeholders and communities that they serve. In an attempt to increase diversity and women’s presence on boards of directors, legislative efforts have enacted gender quotas. We examine how such efforts are perceived by U.S. market participants. We expect that when a firm operating under a quota law meets only the minimum requirement, investors will view the female (...) directors through the lens of token status theory and invest fewer resources in that firm than they will in a firm that exceeds the quota minimum or has the same composition but is not under a quota law. Through an experiment with 207 MTurk participants, we manipulated whether a firm was or was not under a quota law and whether the number of female board members was just at or exceeded the law’s minimum compliance. We find evidence that under a quota system, U.S. market participants tend to view female directors as tokens when the firm is just at the quota minimum, and these perceptions both affect their view of the firm’s prospects and negatively influence investment decisions. Importantly, however, we find that these negative effects can be offset and that resource dependence theory holds if the firm _exceeds_ the quota, signaling that the hiring of female directors is not simply compliance-dependent and subsequently leading U.S. market participants to invest more resources in the firm. (shrink)

Ohio Governor Mike DeWine did an admirable job responding to COVID-10, at least during the early days of the pandemic. In this chapter, however, I focus on his decision in April of 2020 to exempt customers from his mask mandate. To begin, I argue that this decision was not only a public health mistake, but also a moral mistake. Then, I use this case to show, contrary to what DeWine has said, that having the “right facts” is not sufficient for (...) making the right decision. Making the right decision also requires the ability to sort through the moral dimensions of an issue. If that's right, then people who have training in moral philosophy have a kind of expertise from which leaders throughout our society could benefit. (shrink)

ABSTRACT With few exceptions, the effectiveness of continuing education mandates has been measured by self-report assessments of the professional psychologists who fulfill them. The present investigation provided a longitudinal look at the number of approved CE providers and the incidence of licensing board complaints across a succession of two-year cycles prior to, and following, the 2012 implementation of CE mandates in the State of Illinois. Findings showed a substantial increase in the number of CE providers across that time, (...) though no significant change in the incidence of licensing board complaints, suggesting that the increased availability of CE did not translate into lower complaint rates. Possible reasons for these findings are noted, and recommendations for future work are detailed in support of an evidence-based approach to CE that better articulates and aligns its objectives with its outcomes in an era of renewed accountability in the health professions. (shrink)

Several social and cultural developments have led to a rethinking of the place and meaning of friendship within the life of the Church, not least its relation to family (and marriage). Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s theology has great potential for informing such renewed reflection. At face value, he appears to count both Church and family among the divine ‘mandates’, leaving friendship to a realm of ‘freedom’ outside the mandates. Yet closer reading of his writings—not least his correspondence with Bethge—reveals, first, (...) a more singular role of the Church vis-à-vis the mandates (including family); and secondly, congeniality between friendship and the ‘vicarious representative’ practices that lie at the heart of Bonhoeffer’s ecclesiology. Together, these findings allow us to recognise family and friendship as complementary expressions of discipleship, each supporting the other precisely by setting a limit to the specific type of ‘vicarious representative’ responsibility entrusted to each. (shrink)