Matti Häyry | Aalto University School of Business (original) (raw)
Papers by Matti Häyry
This book presents the findings of the ELSAGEN (Ethical, Legal and Social Aspects of Human Geneti... more This book presents the findings of the ELSAGEN (Ethical, Legal and Social Aspects of Human Genetic Databases: A European Comparison) project and provides a unique account of the concerns and issues at stake in the field of Human Genetic Databases (HGDs). The book presents a truly interdisciplinary investigation containing, as it does, input from the disciplines of philosophy, law and sociology. The authors are amongst the most recognised in this research field and the book benefits, as does the reader, from their collective knowledge and expertise.
Yhteis ku n tafilo sofia 9 Yhteis ku n tafilo sofia 23 Platonin kriitikoista ensimmäisten joukoss... more Yhteis ku n tafilo sofia 9 Yhteis ku n tafilo sofia 23 Platonin kriitikoista ensimmäisten joukossa oli hänen oppilaansa Aristoteles.
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, Jun 2, 2020
In her thorough and thoughtful contribution to the Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics title... more In her thorough and thoughtful contribution to the Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics titled “Medical Ethics: Common or Uncommon Morality” Rosamond Rhodes argues that contrary to American mainstream bioethics, medical ethics is not, and should not be, based on common morality, but rather, that the medical profession requires its own distinctive morality.1 She goes on to list sixteen duties that, according to her, form the core of medical ethics proper.
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 2019
Everyone wants to be healthy, and everyone wants to get well when they are ill. Being healthy con... more Everyone wants to be healthy, and everyone wants to get well when they are ill. Being healthy contributes to our ability to exercise our autonomy, and to live the lives we wish to live. According to the UNESCO Declaration of Human Rights, there are rights to health and healthcare. It would be hard to argue against the wish to be healthy-be it on an individual, social, or global level. Additionally, most theories of social justice consider health to be a primary good that should be guaranteed for every citizen. 1,2 Problems start the moment we try to define "health" more precisely. Is "health" an ideal and optimal state that people should strive for but can never fully achieve? Or is "health" a state of normal functioning-an absence of disease? Broadly speaking, there are two main ways of defining health. The biomedical and reductionist view is interested in physiological anomalies, brain chemistry, viruses, bacteria and the like, and seeks to intervene with medical solutions. In this model, sickness and health are understood objectively through measurable facts. In contrast, the holistic, or social, account looks at capabilities and well-being in a wider sense, and at health more as a subjective experience. A pluralistic account of health would take both of these aspects into account. Problems arise if one side is given excessive attention over the other. Health is also a moral concept. Being "unwell" is sometimes seen as an excuse for restricting a person's self-determination, and a reason for questioning her rationality and moral character. Throughout history, self-standing women, sexual minorities, the poor, political dissidents, and other "misfits" have experienced this, as their rights have been curtailed by appeals to sickness and related irrationality. Protecting health, and the right to self-determination, frequently come into conflict when health is discussed. According to a widely-accepted view, society has a duty to protect individuals against health hazards. This is why most countries have safety controls on food production and food products, construction materials, cars, and pharmaceuticals, to mention but a few. However, there are limits to this. While many countries require motorcyclists to wear helmets, only some extend this to cyclists, and none do to pedestrians, although, arguably, cyclists and pedestrians would benefit from helmets as well. This is because, generally, people are assumed to have an extensive right to self-determination over their own lives and bodies. We are allowed to harm our bodies, if we want to, for example, by drinking too much, engaging in dangerous sports, overworking, and staying in abusive relationships. However, when the harm to self is seen to threaten to harm others, or when the autonomy of the person herself is brought into question, there
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics
Sustainability, properly understood, is an existential moral ideal. The United Nations, however, ... more Sustainability, properly understood, is an existential moral ideal. The United Nations, however, defines it in terms of 17 indivisible sustainable development goals. This definition changes the core idea of the concept. It turns sustainability from a moral ideal into a set of economy-based political aspirations. The European Union’s bioeconomy strategy demonstrates the shift aptly and reveals its main problem. When economy is prioritized, social and ecological concerns become secondary. This has been the United Nations line since the Brundtland Commission’s report, Our Common Future in 1987. Considerations of justice illustrate the inadequacy of the approach. Equality and justice require that all those affected by decisions are heard in making them. Under the current operationalization, decisions related to the natural environment and climate change are currently being made without hearing voices that advocate deeper social and ecological equality. After an explication of the proble...
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics
The reversal of Roe v. Wade by the U.S. Supreme Court allowed the states to regulate terminations... more The reversal of Roe v. Wade by the U.S. Supreme Court allowed the states to regulate terminations of pregnancy more autonomously than during 1973–2022. Those who think that women should be legally entitled to abortions at their own request are suggesting that annulling the reversal could be an option. This would mean continued reliance on the interpretation of privacy that Roe v. Wade stood on. The interpretation does not have the moral support that its supporters think. This can be shown by recalling the shortcomings of Judith Jarvis Thomson’s famous violinist example and its application to abortion laws. Philosophically better reasons for not restricting access to abortion can be found in a simple principle of fairness and in sensible theories on the value of human life. Whether or not philosophy has any use in the debate is another matter. Legal decisions to regulate terminations are probably based on pronatalist state interests, shared by the apparently disagreeing parties and i...
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics
This paper provides an overview of the development and the sociopolitical background of legislati... more This paper provides an overview of the development and the sociopolitical background of legislation pertaining to abortion in Finland from the nineteenth century to the current day. The first Abortion Act came to force in 1950. Before that, abortions were handled under criminal law. The 1950 law was restrictive and allowed abortions in very limited circumstances only. Its main aim was to reduce the number of abortions and especially illegal abortions. It was not very successful in reaching these goals, but, significantly, it moved abortions from the realm of the criminal law to the hands of medical professionals. The birth of the welfare state and the prenatal attitudes of 1930s and 1940s Europe played their part in shaping the law. By late 1960s, with the rise of the women’s rights movement and other changes in society, there was pressure to change the outdated law. The new 1970 Abortion Act was broader and allowed abortions for limited social reasons too but left very limited, if ...
Society
Nudging, according to its inventors and defenders, is supposed to provide a non-coercive way of c... more Nudging, according to its inventors and defenders, is supposed to provide a non-coercive way of changing human behavior for the better—a freedom-respecting form of “libertarian paternalism.” Its original point was to complement coercive modes of influence without any need of justification in liberal frameworks. This article shows, using the example of food-product placement in grocery stores, how this image is deceptive. Although nudging practices may not restrict the freedom of consumers, nudging arrangements by public health authorities do restrict the freedom of shopkeepers in standard liberal senses. Libertarianism cannot justify this coercion, and the creed is best left out of the equation as the ideological ruse that it, in this discussion, is. Other liberal theories can justify the coercion, but on grounds that can also be applied to other methods of public health promotion by subsidies and regulation. This result reaffirms that nudging should be seen to complement, not to re...
Bioethics and Social Reality, 2005
Arguments and Analysis in Bioethics, 2010
This book presents the findings of the ELSAGEN (Ethical, Legal and Social Aspects of Human Geneti... more This book presents the findings of the ELSAGEN (Ethical, Legal and Social Aspects of Human Genetic Databases: A European Comparison) project and provides a unique account of the concerns and issues at stake in the field of Human Genetic Databases (HGDs). The book presents a truly interdisciplinary investigation containing, as it does, input from the disciplines of philosophy, law and sociology. The authors are amongst the most recognised in this research field and the book benefits, as does the reader, from their collective knowledge and expertise.
Yhteis ku n tafilo sofia 9 Yhteis ku n tafilo sofia 23 Platonin kriitikoista ensimmäisten joukoss... more Yhteis ku n tafilo sofia 9 Yhteis ku n tafilo sofia 23 Platonin kriitikoista ensimmäisten joukossa oli hänen oppilaansa Aristoteles.
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, Jun 2, 2020
In her thorough and thoughtful contribution to the Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics title... more In her thorough and thoughtful contribution to the Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics titled “Medical Ethics: Common or Uncommon Morality” Rosamond Rhodes argues that contrary to American mainstream bioethics, medical ethics is not, and should not be, based on common morality, but rather, that the medical profession requires its own distinctive morality.1 She goes on to list sixteen duties that, according to her, form the core of medical ethics proper.
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 2019
Everyone wants to be healthy, and everyone wants to get well when they are ill. Being healthy con... more Everyone wants to be healthy, and everyone wants to get well when they are ill. Being healthy contributes to our ability to exercise our autonomy, and to live the lives we wish to live. According to the UNESCO Declaration of Human Rights, there are rights to health and healthcare. It would be hard to argue against the wish to be healthy-be it on an individual, social, or global level. Additionally, most theories of social justice consider health to be a primary good that should be guaranteed for every citizen. 1,2 Problems start the moment we try to define "health" more precisely. Is "health" an ideal and optimal state that people should strive for but can never fully achieve? Or is "health" a state of normal functioning-an absence of disease? Broadly speaking, there are two main ways of defining health. The biomedical and reductionist view is interested in physiological anomalies, brain chemistry, viruses, bacteria and the like, and seeks to intervene with medical solutions. In this model, sickness and health are understood objectively through measurable facts. In contrast, the holistic, or social, account looks at capabilities and well-being in a wider sense, and at health more as a subjective experience. A pluralistic account of health would take both of these aspects into account. Problems arise if one side is given excessive attention over the other. Health is also a moral concept. Being "unwell" is sometimes seen as an excuse for restricting a person's self-determination, and a reason for questioning her rationality and moral character. Throughout history, self-standing women, sexual minorities, the poor, political dissidents, and other "misfits" have experienced this, as their rights have been curtailed by appeals to sickness and related irrationality. Protecting health, and the right to self-determination, frequently come into conflict when health is discussed. According to a widely-accepted view, society has a duty to protect individuals against health hazards. This is why most countries have safety controls on food production and food products, construction materials, cars, and pharmaceuticals, to mention but a few. However, there are limits to this. While many countries require motorcyclists to wear helmets, only some extend this to cyclists, and none do to pedestrians, although, arguably, cyclists and pedestrians would benefit from helmets as well. This is because, generally, people are assumed to have an extensive right to self-determination over their own lives and bodies. We are allowed to harm our bodies, if we want to, for example, by drinking too much, engaging in dangerous sports, overworking, and staying in abusive relationships. However, when the harm to self is seen to threaten to harm others, or when the autonomy of the person herself is brought into question, there
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics
Sustainability, properly understood, is an existential moral ideal. The United Nations, however, ... more Sustainability, properly understood, is an existential moral ideal. The United Nations, however, defines it in terms of 17 indivisible sustainable development goals. This definition changes the core idea of the concept. It turns sustainability from a moral ideal into a set of economy-based political aspirations. The European Union’s bioeconomy strategy demonstrates the shift aptly and reveals its main problem. When economy is prioritized, social and ecological concerns become secondary. This has been the United Nations line since the Brundtland Commission’s report, Our Common Future in 1987. Considerations of justice illustrate the inadequacy of the approach. Equality and justice require that all those affected by decisions are heard in making them. Under the current operationalization, decisions related to the natural environment and climate change are currently being made without hearing voices that advocate deeper social and ecological equality. After an explication of the proble...
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics
The reversal of Roe v. Wade by the U.S. Supreme Court allowed the states to regulate terminations... more The reversal of Roe v. Wade by the U.S. Supreme Court allowed the states to regulate terminations of pregnancy more autonomously than during 1973–2022. Those who think that women should be legally entitled to abortions at their own request are suggesting that annulling the reversal could be an option. This would mean continued reliance on the interpretation of privacy that Roe v. Wade stood on. The interpretation does not have the moral support that its supporters think. This can be shown by recalling the shortcomings of Judith Jarvis Thomson’s famous violinist example and its application to abortion laws. Philosophically better reasons for not restricting access to abortion can be found in a simple principle of fairness and in sensible theories on the value of human life. Whether or not philosophy has any use in the debate is another matter. Legal decisions to regulate terminations are probably based on pronatalist state interests, shared by the apparently disagreeing parties and i...
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics
This paper provides an overview of the development and the sociopolitical background of legislati... more This paper provides an overview of the development and the sociopolitical background of legislation pertaining to abortion in Finland from the nineteenth century to the current day. The first Abortion Act came to force in 1950. Before that, abortions were handled under criminal law. The 1950 law was restrictive and allowed abortions in very limited circumstances only. Its main aim was to reduce the number of abortions and especially illegal abortions. It was not very successful in reaching these goals, but, significantly, it moved abortions from the realm of the criminal law to the hands of medical professionals. The birth of the welfare state and the prenatal attitudes of 1930s and 1940s Europe played their part in shaping the law. By late 1960s, with the rise of the women’s rights movement and other changes in society, there was pressure to change the outdated law. The new 1970 Abortion Act was broader and allowed abortions for limited social reasons too but left very limited, if ...
Society
Nudging, according to its inventors and defenders, is supposed to provide a non-coercive way of c... more Nudging, according to its inventors and defenders, is supposed to provide a non-coercive way of changing human behavior for the better—a freedom-respecting form of “libertarian paternalism.” Its original point was to complement coercive modes of influence without any need of justification in liberal frameworks. This article shows, using the example of food-product placement in grocery stores, how this image is deceptive. Although nudging practices may not restrict the freedom of consumers, nudging arrangements by public health authorities do restrict the freedom of shopkeepers in standard liberal senses. Libertarianism cannot justify this coercion, and the creed is best left out of the equation as the ideological ruse that it, in this discussion, is. Other liberal theories can justify the coercion, but on grounds that can also be applied to other methods of public health promotion by subsidies and regulation. This result reaffirms that nudging should be seen to complement, not to re...
Bioethics and Social Reality, 2005
Arguments and Analysis in Bioethics, 2010
