Paternalism Al Dente

Suzy Killmister (University of Connecticut, Massey University)

Abstract: Liberals commonly make a distinction between hard paternalism and soft paternalism.  Hard paternalism refers to interventions done to promote the well-being of the agent, but against her will.  Since hard paternalism involves a violation of personal autonomy, it is generally taken to be in tension with liberal commitments.  Soft paternalism, on the other hand, refers to interventions intended to prevent actions that are significantly non-voluntary.  Since the goal is to implement rather than override the agent's will, soft paternalism is generally taken to be compatible with liberal respect for persons.  In this paper I explore some difficulties surrounding the concept of soft paternalism.  Drawing on my broader theory of autonomy, I will argue that even when intervention could better realise the agent's autonomy, it will almost always fail to afford her due respect.  Soft paternalism turns out to have a quite a bit of bite.  Moreover, the tension that soft paternalism illuminates between intervention and respect for persons suggests the surprising conclusion that the right to autonomy does not track autonomy competence.