Legal & Ethical (Week 5)

Question 1

What defines autonomy and paternalism?

Answer 1

Autonomy encompasses self-governance, choice, ownership, and authenticity. Paternalism involves restricting one’s autonomous choices to protect them or a broader group from harm.

Question 1

Can you name the case studies mentioned that involve restricting consumer choices?

Answer 1

The case studies include corporate decisions limiting product access, regulations against doping in sports, and restrictions on purchasing harmful yet legal products.

Question 2

What example does Menzel (2009) provide regarding consumer choices?

Answer 2

Menzel’s example concerns health insurance in the USA, highlighting how consumer autonomy intersects with limited options for some high-risk individuals.

Question 3

What solutions does Menzel propose in the context of health insurance issues?

Answer 3

Menzel advocates against legislation and favors mandatory healthcare with anti-discriminatory measures, balancing autonomy and societal benefits.

Question 4

According to Savulescu (2015), what alternative approach does he propose regarding doping in sports?

Answer 4

Savulescu suggests the concept of “safe doping” within physiological limits as an alternative approach.

Question 5

Why might sugar taxes or product bans be justified according to the discussion?

Answer 5

Such policies may be justified if consumers make non-autonomous choices due to lack of awareness or influenced decisions.

Question 6

What conflict arises concerning policy restrictions and the gourmand’s perspective?

Answer 6

The gourmand understands the health implications but is not motivated by them, raising questions about the rationality of restrictions.