Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=903422
 
 

Citations (2)



 
 

Footnotes (290)



 


 



The Right to Be Hurt - Testing the Boundaries of Consent


Vera Bergelson


Rutgers Law School - Newark


George Washington Law Review, Vol. 75, p. 165, 2007
Rutgers School of Law-Newark Research Papers No. 011

Abstract:     
People's right to consent to pain, injury or death has always been one of the most controversial issues in criminal law and moral philosophy. In recent years, that issue has moved to the forefront of public, legislative, and academic debates in the United States and abroad due to a series of high-profile criminal trials, which involved consenting victims in various contexts - from sadomasochism and cannibalism to experimental medical treatment and mercy killing.

Currently, American criminal law does not recognize consent of the victim as a defense to bodily harm, except in a few historically defined circumstances. That rule has been criticized for its arbitrary scope, outdated rationales, and potential for moralistic manipulation. Yet, despite those criticisms, no principled alternative has been worked out. This article is an attempt to develop a set of normative requirements for a new rule governing consensual bodily harm and a general defense of consent.

The new rule would treat valid (voluntary and rational) consent of the victim as a defense of partial or complete justification. Partial justification is warranted by the mere fact that consensual harm does not involve at least one aspect of a paradigmatic offense, namely a rights' violation. The victim was a "co-author" of his own injury and thus the perpetrator should not bear full responsibility for it. Complete justification, on the other hand, would require that, in addition to the victim's consent, the perpetrator had a "good reason" for his harmful action: he intended to achieve a better balance of harms/evils and benefits and, in fact, managed to achieve it. This article rejects the absolute character of today's law. Instead, it promotes a balancing test that takes into account the severity of harm to the victim's interests and dignity as well as the importance of the reasons that caused the harmful act.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 98

Keywords: criminal law, consent, harm, dignity

Accepted Paper Series





Download This Paper

Date posted: May 19, 2006  

Suggested Citation

Bergelson, Vera, The Right to Be Hurt - Testing the Boundaries of Consent. George Washington Law Review, Vol. 75, p. 165, 2007; Rutgers School of Law-Newark Research Papers No. 011. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=903422

Contact Information

Vera Bergelson (Contact Author)
Rutgers Law School - Newark ( email )
123 Washington Street
Newark, NJ 07102
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 2,896
Downloads: 541
Download Rank: 28,552
Citations:  2
Footnotes:  290

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo4 in 0.375 seconds