Do we have a right to harm ourselves?
by Sam
Debates over whether we have the right to harm ourselves often focus on especially serious cases, such as physician-assisted suicide. But an equally robust debate over self-harm involves ‘vice,’ such as gambling, smoking and drinking. The pendulum of American attitudes on vice has swung from extreme regulation and repression in the beginning of the 20th century, to an attitude more tolerant of free choice in today’s world. Although gambling remains high circumscribed throughout the country, alcohol is widely permitted under a scheme restrictions regarding age and location.
Smoking, on the other hand, has witnessed a different history of regulation. Once hardly encumbered by governmental interference, smoking now endures age and location prohibitions in addition to heavy taxation. Yesterday, the United States House of Representatives took a major stride in increasing government authority over smoking by approving a measure to place tobacco products under the purview of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). While the legislation would not allow the FDA to remove nicotine from tobacco products or halt the manufacture and sale of tobacco products, it would permit federal authorities to reduce the quantities of nicotine in tobacco products and also require the removal of other potentially carcinogenic ingredients.
What does this say about the freedom to engage in what most agree is a harmful activity?