The regulation of hazards and hazardous behaviors.

Abstract

Risks to individuals engaged in "high risk" behaviors may be present because of the individual's own actions, as in the case of smoking. Alternatively, the risks may be present either because of factors in the environment such as carcinogens, or because of the causal actions of others, such as pollution by industries. Traditionally, justifications for policies that would control hazards and restrict hazardous behaviors have been based on paternalistic principles or on a theory of social justice. Arguments for both are criticized and rejected in favor of a third alternative rooted in utilitarian moral theory. It is argued that: (1) paternalism leads to unacceptable consequences because it would allow too much limitation of individual liberty by policy makers; (2) justice-based arguments are too abstract for public policy problems and often rest on questionable empirical assumptions; and (3) utilitarian suggestions about the use of cost-benefit analysis for the resolution of these health policy problems are more promising than available alternatives, because they provide a solid moral basis for allocating scarce resources and for controlling hazardous behaviors.