Common Interests and National Interests: Bridging the Values/Interests Gap
In: American foreign policy interests, Band 25, Heft 1, S. 13-18
ISSN: 1533-2128
In: American foreign policy interests, Band 25, Heft 1, S. 13-18
ISSN: 1533-2128
In: Huxtable , R 2017 , ' Cryonics in the courtroom : Which interests? Whose interests? ' , Medical Law Review . https://doi.org/10.1093/medlaw/fwx045
In an apparent international first, the High Court has allowed a terminally ill 14-year-old to be cryopreserved after her death. The patient, JS, requested this, as she hoped one day to be reanimated and cured. Jackson J focused on the welfare (or best interests) of JS as she approached the end of her life and particularly on her (apparently) competent wish to be cryopreserved. I consider the interests involved in a decision to undergo cryonics, specifically exploring which interests and whose interests are engaged. Starting with autonomy interests, the judgment implicitly supported a relational account of autonomy, but was dominated by a subjective interpretation of autonomy, which prioritised JS's wishes. Questions nevertheless arise about whether the dying person is entitled to legislate for the reanimated person he or she might become. Temporal concerns also feature when we interpret welfare in terms of happiness, because the dying person and the (potential) future reanimated person might have different interests at different times. Finally, I widen the analysis to accommodate the interests of others, by exploring whether cryonics is in, or contrary to, the public interest. Utilising different accounts of the public interest, I argue that the case for cryonics is not entirely made out. These observations on autonomy, happiness and the public interest combine to suggest that, although there may not be a decisive case for denying a wish like JS's, there is a case for caution, at least while we seek to clarify and resolve the different interests in issue.
BASE
In: Political theory: an international journal of political philosophy, Band 3, Heft 3, S. 259-276
ISSN: 0090-5917
BOTH CONCEPTS ARE EXPLICATED IN DESCRIPTIVE TERMS HERE. THE CONCLUSION OF THIS ARTICLE PROPERLY UNDERSTOOD, IS THAT TO ASSERT THAT SOME COURSE OF ACTION IS IN SOMEONE'S SELF-INTEREST OR IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST DOES NOT IMPLY THAT THIS ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN.
In: American foreign policy interests: journal of the National Committee on American Foreign Policy, Inc, Band 25, Heft 1, S. 13-18
ISSN: 1080-3920
In: Proceedings of the annual meeting / American Society of International Law, Band 71, S. 32-32
ISSN: 2169-1118
In: Peace matters, Heft 52, S. 7-9
ISSN: 1350-3006
In: Self-Interest and Public Interest in Western Politics, S. 1-28
SSRN
Working paper
In: Stanford journal of international law, Band 31, Heft 2, S. 359-386
ISSN: 0731-5082
SSRN
Working paper
In: European Review of Private Law, Band 12, Heft 1, S. 18-25
ISSN: 0928-9801
Abstract: The 2001 Cape Town Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment, with the Aircraft Equipment Protocol, is a major new convention which is designed to provide greatly enhanced security for financiers and lessors of aircraft objects, railway rolling stock and space property such as satellites. While previous conventions have provided a uniform conflict of laws rule they do not address the problem of major differences between legal systems, particularly in their attitude to the recognition and enforcement of security interests. The Convention's solution to these problems is radical and imaginative; it is no less than the creation of a wholly sui generis international interest which derives its force from the Convention, not from national law, which is perfected by registration in an International Registry and which upon registration is accorded priority over subsequently registered interests and unregistered interests and is given protection in the event of the debtor's insolvency. This paper, after describing the sphere of application of the Convention, analyses the nature of the international interest for which it provides and the relationship between that interest and interests arising under national law.