Controlling Homeless People? Power, Interventionism and Legitimacy
Controlling Homeless People? Power, Interventionism and Legitimacy
复制标题
控制无家可归者？
作者：
B. Watts;S. Fitzpatrick;S. Johnsen
有激烈的辩论的合法性的干预措施，寻求行为改变的一部分，街头无家可归的人。“硬”措施，如逮捕乞讨者，尤其有争议，但“软”干预，如动机性访谈，也引起了反对，理由是它们是家长式的。与此同时，一些服务提供者的“不干预”立场被指责为延续有害的街头生活方式。受露丝格兰特的激励的伦理道德的启发，我们提出了一个规范的框架，在这一领域的应用。通过系统的探索格兰特的三个“合法性标准”（合法的目的，自愿的反应，对性格的影响），和一个额外的结果为重点的第四（有效性，比例和平衡），我们试图动摇任何直观的假设，即不干预主义的方法必然比干预主义的道德上更站得住脚。然而，我们也阐明了证明社会控制措施合理性所需的高道德和经验标准。
Abstract There is intense debate over the legitimacy of interventions which seek behavioural change on the part of street homeless people. ‘Hard’ measures, such as arresting people for begging, are particularly controversial, but ‘softer’ interventions such as motivational interviewing have also prompted objections on grounds that they are paternalistic. At the same time, the ‘non-interventionist’ stance of some service providers has been accused of perpetuating harmful street lifestyles. Inspired by Ruth Grant's philosophically informed interrogation of the ethics of incentives, we propose a normative framework for application in this field. Via systematic exploration of Grant's three ‘legitimacy standards’ (legitimate purpose, voluntary response, effects on character), and an additional outcome-focussed fourth (effectiveness, proportionality and balance), we attempt to unsettle any intuitive assumption that non-interventionist approaches are necessarily more morally defensible than interventionist ones. We also, however, explicate the high ethical and empirical bar required to justify social control measures.
酒精对大脑和行为的影响。
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2010
期刊：
Alcohol research & health : the journal of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism
影响因子：
--
作者：
Sullivan,EdithV;Harris,RAdron;Pfefferbaum,Adolf
通讯作者：
Pfefferbaum,Adolf
能动性、越轨和无家可归的原因：情境化理性行动分析
DOI：
10.1080/14616710802693607
发表时间：
2009
期刊：
European Journal of Housing Policy
影响因子：
--
作者：
Nicholls C
通讯作者：
Nicholls C