How permissive consent works

Consent that is voluntary, informed and given by a competent person sometimes transforms a wrong into a right act. How does consent that meets these requirements change the moral property of an act, namely that of being a wronging of a person? This is the question this paper will deal with. Some authors argue that valid consent changes the moral property of an act by changing the reasons which speak against the act. This account of the normative force of consent will be critically examined and rejected. An alternative model will then be put forward and defended according to which consent changes the moral property of an act if and only if the wrong-making property of the act is that it is not consented to. The upshot will be that consent does not eliminate the wrong-making property if the unconsented act is wrong for other reasons than not being consented to.     

Contemporary transgender health experience and health situation in prisons: A scoping review of extant published literature (2000–2019)

Abstract

Background: Many jurisdictions globally have no specific prison policy to guide prison management and prison staff in relation to the special needs of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) prisoners despite the United Nations for the Treatment of Prisoners Standard Minimum Rules and the updated 2017 Yogyakarta Principles on the Application of International Human Rights Law in relation to Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity. Within LGBT prison groups, transgender people represent a key special population with distinct needs and rights, with incarceration rates greater than that of the general population, and who experience unique vulnerabilities in prisons.

Aims/Method: A scoping review was conducted of extant information on the transgender prison situation, their unique health needs and outcomes in contemporary prison settings. Fifty-nine publications were charted and thematically analyzed.

Results: Five key themes emerged: Transgender definition and terminology used in prison publications; Prison housing and classification systems; Conduct of correctional staff toward incarcerated transgender people; Gender affirmation, health experiences and situational health risks of incarcerated transgender people; and Transgender access to gender-related healthcare in prison.

Conclusions: The review highlights the need for practical prison based measures in the form of increased advocacy, awareness raising, desensitization of high level prison management, prison staff and prison healthcare providers, and clinical and cultural competence institutional training on transgender patient care. The review underscores the need to uphold the existing international mandates to take measures to protect incarcerated transgender people from violence and stigmatization without restricting rights, and provide adequate gender sensitive and gender affirming healthcare, including hormone therapy and gender reassignment.     

NON‐VIOLENCE AND NONHUMANS: Foundations for Animal Welfare in the Thought of Mohandas Gandhi and Albert Schweitzer

This essay explores how the principles of ahimsa and reverence for life provide a foundation for animal welfare in the thought of Mohandas Gandhi and Albert Schweitzer, respectively. This exploration unfolds through a consideration of the contextual background of both thinkers, the scope of life to which they apply their respective principles, and both the ethical ramifications and limitations of this application. Within this common framework, the author delineates the striking commonalities and the significant disparities between Gandhi and Schweitzer. This comparison opens a common space within which ecologically‐minded Hindus and Christians can dialogue, augmenting each other's positions by drawing on respected thinkers in their traditions. It also provides an opportunity, within the tensions highlighted at the intersection of Gandhi and Schweitzer's thought, to further construct a foundation for animal welfare in contemporary discussions.     

Creaturely Solidarity

This essay examines several recent contributions to the growing literature on animal ethics from Christian perspectives. I categorize the four books under review in one of three ways depending on the scholars' methodological points of departure: (1) a reconstruction of the place of other animals in Christian history through a selective retrieval of texts and practices; (2) an identification of a key Christian ethical principle; and (3) a reconsideration of foundational doctrines of systematic theology. On the premise that social ethicists are interested in not only understanding the world, but also changing it, I observe that these authors have offered different answers to the following three questions: (1) whether the theoretical basis for reform is ultimately grounded upon notions of human sameness or difference with other animals; (2) whether scholar‐activists should emphasize logic over passion or values over interests (or vice versa) in their calls for transformation; and (3) whether moral motivation for their targeted audiences is best served by reliance upon secular argumentation and interdisciplinary research or upon the distinctive claims of revelation and other tradition‐specific norms. I conclude by offering my own thoughts about which approaches might prove more effective than others.     

Laying Claim to Martin Luther King Jr. and the Civil Rights Legacy

This essay assesses the oft-made link between Walter Rauschenbusch and Martin Luther King Jr. Denying neither Rauschenbusch’s influence on King nor King’s social gospel status, it nevertheless questions the way historians locate Rauschenbusch’s legacy in King and the civil rights movement. This strategy, however unintentionally, reproduces the white social gospel’s “astigmatism” on race and undermines the contributions of black social gospel (and other neglected) leaders even as revised histories affirm them. After exploring King’s references to Rauschenbusch and Rauschenbusch’s reflections on race, the paper compares their theologies. This comparison reveals key differences on race and economic justice that ramify across Rauschenbusch’s and King’s distinctive articulations of social gospel categories, further complicating historians’ claims on King. Oversimplifying the connection between these important figures in religious ethics distorts theological understanding of social gospel legacies and compromises their power for future generations.     

AGREEING TO DISAGREE: Indigenous Pluralism from Human Rights to Bioethics

David Hollenbach, working within the context of human rights theory, has developed the notion of "indigenous pluralism" as a means of coping with the problems that arise when different religious traditions hold distinct or incompatible interpretations of human rights. It will be argued that indigenous pluralism is a theoretically and practically useful concept for bioethics as well and hence should be incorporated into bioethical methodology and processes of bioethical policy formation. Subsequently, the notion of indigenous pluralism will be discussed in relation to determinations of death as a means of illustrating this concept's applicability to bioethical inquiry.     

Organizing Race

Faith‐based community organizing is receiving an increasing amount of attention from scholars of religious ethics. This essay is motivated by the worry that accounts of such organizing depend on a problematic embrace of multiculturalism, an embrace characteristic of our neoliberal era. Like the powers that they purport to challenge, organizing efforts often embrace difference (racial, gender, and religious) only when it is carefully managed. This is being challenged by theological accounts of organizing that take the religious dimension of such efforts seriously, as well as by feminist critiques of community organizing. This essay probes how race might be taken just as seriously by religious ethicists who study community organizing. Drawing on the civil rights movement's legacy of faith‐based community mobilization as well as traditions of Black theological reflection, this essay challenges the easy embrace of multi‐racial coalitions in faith‐based organizing.