Paternalism and Mill

This week, we read about paternalism. Dworkin defines paternalism as “ the interference with a person’s liberty of action justified by reasons referring exclusively to the welfare, good, happiness, needs, interests or values of the
person being coerced” (65).

Essentially, paternalism is when the governing authorities justify laws on the basis of how much good they bring about.

One form of paternalism that everyone experiences is the parent-child relationship. (In fact, the parent-child relationship is built into the term “paternalism.” When the government acts like our parents, the are engaging in paternalism.) Children often make decisions that are terrible for them, so their parents are justified in intervening and not allowing them to do things that would harm themselves.

Mill justifies this form of paternalism by appealing to the mental state of children. Children have not fully developed their faculty of reason, so they need a reasonable adult to help them pursue their own good. Mill even thinks that unenlightened people groups fall into this category of underdeveloped reason. If a nation has not been enlightened and the people cannot reason for themselves, Mill thinks that the government is justified (and possibly even obligated) to enforce paternalistic laws for their own good. Mill placed ancient Rome in this category.

However, in most cases, Mill is opposed to paternalism. Due to his optimistic view of human nature, Mill does not think that the good ends of paternalistic laws outweigh the evil of restricting the liberty of an autonomous person. The good of liberty almost always outweighs any good that a paternalistic law could bring about according to Mill.

Dworkin argues for a broader form of paternalism than Mill would be comfortable with. While Dworkin argues from the same Utilitarian foundation as Mill, he arrives at a broader application of paternalism. Ultimately, Dworkin argues that paternalism is justified when the law is something that a “rational person” would agree to. This encompasses laws that force children to attend school and that force drivers and passengers in a car to wear a seat belt.

However, while almost everyone will agree that rational people wear seat belts, this justification for paternalism has potential to open the floodgates of government regulations that restrict liberty.

Works Cited:

Dworkin, Gerald. “Paternalism”. 1972.