Papers by Anthony McCarthy
Linacre Quarterly, 2023
Is it possible to donate unpaired vital organs, foreseeing but not intending one’s own death? We ... more Is it possible to donate unpaired vital organs, foreseeing but not intending one’s own death? We argue that this is indeed psychologically possible, and thus far agree with Charles Camosy and Joseph Vukov in their recent paper on “double effect donation.” Where we disagree with these authors is that we see double-effect donation not as a morally praiseworthy act akin to mar- tyrdom but as a morally impermissible act that necessarily disrespects human bodily integrity. Respect for bodily integrity goes beyond avoiding the aim to kill; not all side effects of deliberate bodily interventions can be outweighed by intended benefits for another even if the subject fully consents. It is not any necessary intention to kill or harm another or oneself that makes lethal donation/harvesting illicit but the more immediate intention to accept or perform surgery on an (innocent) person combined with the foresight of lethal harm and no health-related good for him or her. Double-effect donation falls foul of the first condition of double-effect reasoning in that the immediate act is wrong in itself. We argue further that the wider effects of such don- ation would be socially disastrous and corrupting of the medical profession: doctors should retain a sense of nonnegotiable respect for bodily integrity even when they intervene on willing subjects for the benefit of others.
Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 2023
Is moral or other regret for abortion an indicator that abortion may not be morally or prudential... more Is moral or other regret for abortion an indicator that abortion may not be morally or prudentially choice worthy? This paper examines the work of Kate Greasley in this area, who offers an explanation of any asymmetry in openness to regret between women who have abortions and women who give birth. The latter, not unlike Derek Parfit’s 14-year-old who conceives deliberately, may feel duty-bound not to regret their decision (in their case, to continue their pregnancy) and to affirm the life of their child. In response to Greasley, testimonial evidence of one group cannot be dismissed simply because regret may be less available to another group of decision-makers. Moreover, if moral regret for childbearing is uncommon, this is not because mothers have a moral duty, as Greasley argues, not to regret even a morally mistaken choice to conceive. On the contrary, one must separate the evaluation of choices and of the results of these choices, whether positive or negative. Regret, while not infallible, can elucidate values at stake in choices, and testimonial evidence in the form of regret should be taken more seriously in regard to certain kinds of choice.
The Linacre Quarterly, 2019
Is the “act itself” of separating a pregnant woman and her previable child neither good nor bad m... more Is the “act itself” of separating a pregnant woman and her previable child neither good nor bad morally, considered in the abstract? Recently, Maureen Condic and Donna Harrison have argued that such separation is justified to protect the mother’s life and that it does not constitute an abortion as the aim is not to kill the child. In our article on maternal–fetal conflicts, we agree there need be no such aim to kill (supplementing aims such as to remove). However, we argue that to understand “abortion” as performed only where the death of the child is intended is to define the term too narrowly. Respect for the mother, the fetus, and the bond between them goes well beyond avoiding any such aim. We distinguish between legitimate maternal treatments simply aimed at treating or removing a damaged part of the woman and illegitimate treatments that focus harmfully on the fetal body and its presence within the mother’s body. In obstetrics as elsewhere, not all side effects for one subject...
BMJ sexual & reproductive health, 2018
Regarding the Scottish decision on home abortion of 26 October 2017, Lord J, Regan L, Kasliwal A,... more Regarding the Scottish decision on home abortion of 26 October 2017, Lord J, Regan L, Kasliwal A, et al claim that “Home use of misoprostol in Scotland is relatively new. The larger abortion services in Scotland report widescale uptake of home use of misoprostol among women and that it is highly appreciated with no negative impact on services”. The Scottish ‘abortion services’ consulted are not named and the reference for the bold claim that home use of misoprostol is ‘highly appreciated’ is ‘S Cameron (co-author), personal communication 2018’. Such statements do not inspire confidence. In response to some other claims made in the article: women having better control over timing in practice will mean less precision in timing, since medical supervision is supposed to guarantee ‘correct’ time between drugs and a ‘correct’ route of administration, whether sublingual, buccal or vaginal. If these are departed from, the effectiveness goes down, and the complications go up. This is well known. As regards travel and onset of bleeding, the Creinin et al paper1 referred to by the authors had a bleeding onset …
BMJ, 2005
Groups were as different as chalk and cheese Editor-Wei et al say that the results of their obser... more Groups were as different as chalk and cheese Editor-Wei et al say that the results of their observational study of treatment with statins in routine clinical practice in Tayside are consistent with, and similar to, those reported in clinical trials. 1 This conclusion is hardly justified. A cohort of patients, defined by a discharge diagnosis of myocardial infarction between January 1993 and December 2001, was studied to compare the outcomes in those treated with statins and those not receiving these drugs. The data clearly show that the two groups differed substantially in terms of age, sex, comorbidity, and other cardiovascular drug treatment-all of these factors were biased in favour of a poorer outcome in patients not given statins. Furthermore, the two groups belonged to different time periods, most of the untreated patients to the earlier part and most of those given statins to the later part of the study. Given the changes between 1993 and 2001-including, for example, those related to the management of acute myocardial infarction and the criteria for diagnosis-it is only to be expected that the untreated group would have a higher risk of subsequent cardiovascular events. Multivariate analysis was reported as showing that statins reduced all cause mortality by 31% and the composite end point of myocardial infarction plus cardiovascular mortality by 18%. These results should be greeted with scepticism. Firstly, many trials of statins have failed to show any reduction whatsoever in all cause mortality. 2-5 Secondly, as observed in other studies, any reduction in all cause mortality would be expected to be much less than that for composite cardiovascular end points. 2 4 5 The two groups in this study were as different as chalk and cheese. It should come as no surprise, therefore, that the results were anomalous. In such circumstances, no amount of statistical trickery could be expected to furnish anything of value.
BMJ, 2009
Kamerow asserts that “ABC” (abstain, be faithful, condom use) in Uganda probably owed most of its... more Kamerow asserts that “ABC” (abstain, be faithful, condom use) in Uganda probably owed most of its effectiveness to greater use of condoms.1 This is contradicted in several papers.2 3 4 In one the government …
Linacre Quarterly , 2019
Is the “act itself” of separating a pregnant woman and her previable child neither good nor bad m... more Is the “act itself” of separating a pregnant woman and her previable child neither good nor bad morally, considered in the abstract? Recently, Maureen Condic and Donna Harrison have argued that such separation is justified to protect the mother’s life and that it does not constitute an abortion as the aim is not to kill the child. In our article on maternal–fetal conflicts, we agree there need be no such aim to kill (supplementing aims such as to remove). However, we argue that to understand “abortion” as performed only where the death of the child is intended is to define the term too narrowly. Respect for the mother, the fetus, and the bond between them goes well beyond avoiding any such aim. We distinguish between legitimate maternal treatments simply aimed at treating or removing a damaged part of the woman and illegitimate treatments that focus harmfully on the fetal body and its presence within the mother’s body. In obstetrics as elsewhere, not all side effects for one subject of intervention can be outweighed by intended benefits for another. Certain side effects of certain intended interventions are morally conclusive.
An examination of philosophical arguments in favour of a pro-choice position. (It is a contributi... more An examination of philosophical arguments in favour of a pro-choice position. (It is a contribution to a book on Ireland's Eighth Amendment).
Logos i Ethnos, 2020
An analysis of the debate between Elizabeth Anscombe and Herbert McCabe on the morality of contra... more An analysis of the debate between Elizabeth Anscombe and Herbert McCabe on the morality of contraceptive acts. The paper was delivered at the symposium on Anscombe's philosophy at the Anscombe Centre for Bioethics in 2017.
An early draft of a paper which was published in Gender: Spojrzenie Krytyczne [Gender: A Critical... more An early draft of a paper which was published in Gender: Spojrzenie Krytyczne [Gender: A Critical Look] ed. Jaroslaw Jagiello and Dariusz Oko (Kielce: Jenosc 2017).
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/nbfr.12072_4/abstract
http://www.cmq.org.uk/CMQ/2014/Previability-Induction-Debate.html
In this brief paper (co-authored with Alexander Pruss) we evaluate an argument attempting to just... more In this brief paper (co-authored with Alexander Pruss) we evaluate an argument attempting to justify the limited use of condoms to prevent HIV transmission, assuming that condoms are indeed (bearing in mind ‘risk compensation’) an effective means to do this. Whether this assumption is correct is a question for the empirical sciences.1
The argument we are discussing is based on the Principle of Double Effect and holds that use of a condom by a married couple one member of whom is HIV positive is permissible when the condom is intended to block the transmission of the virus, and blockage of the sperm and/or prevention of conception is seen as an unintended side-effect. The argument is claimed by its proponents not to require any revision in the Catholic teaching that marital contraception is not morally permissible.
We will argue, however, that the Double Effect argument fails, a failure that is especially clear given one of the stronger kinds of account of what is wrong with contraception, namely biological-unity personalist accounts. If our argument holds, the use of condoms in consensual marital sexual activity will not be permissible even when one party is HIV positive. Depending on the risks and benefits at stake for the individual couple, the couple may need to abstain from intercourse entirely and show their love in other ways.
The anthropologist Mary Douglas, in her book Natural Symbols, boldly states:
A Dutch Labour MP has made a proposal for forced "temporary" sterilizations of those the state de... more A Dutch Labour MP has made a proposal for forced "temporary" sterilizations of those the state deems to be "unfit parents" (i.e. a category far wider than parents with ID), to be reviewed every 2 years, a proposal which gained the warm support of the celebrity atheist Richard Dawkins -see Linacre Centre, 1988): 1-25. 3 A useful recent survey of the sterilisation of people with ID is AJ Stansfield, AJ Holland, ICH Clare, "The sterilisation of people with intellectual disabilities in England and Wales during the period 1988 to 1999", Journal of Intellectual Disability Research 51, 8 (2007): 569-579. The abstract for this paper states that the survey covered seventy-three people between age 12 and 41 years, only 5% of whom were men. All but one had an intellectual disability (ID). The authors add "Full applications were made for 50 of the 73 (68.5%) 30
Studia Philosophiae Christianae, 2015
Catholic sexual ethics proposes a number of exceptionless moral norms. This distinguishes it from... more Catholic sexual ethics proposes a number of exceptionless moral norms. This distinguishes it from theories which deny the possibility of any exceptionless moral norms (e.g. the proportionalist approach proposed in the aftermath of Humanae Vitae and condemned in Veritatis Splendor). I argue that Catholic teaching on sexual ethics refers to chosen physical structures in such a way as to make ‘new natural law’ theory inherently unstable. I outline a theory of “the moral act” (Veritatis Splendor 78) which emphasises the place which chosen physical features – in particular, chosen sexual structures – play in specifying human actions. I conclude that this account, involving what I term UMDAs, is needed to make sense of the Church’s teaching in these areas.
Books by Anthony McCarthy
Ethical Sex (Chaper 4), 2016
Conditional willing of morally impermissible actions like adultery tells us something about the m... more Conditional willing of morally impermissible actions like adultery tells us something about the moral agent, as does the liability to will such actions in certain unrealised contingencies. However, I argue, a liability to will wrongful actions in some circumstances need not (though it might) affect the moral permissibility of the act intended here and now e.g. terms of going through a marriage ceremony or enjoying sexual acts with one's spouse. This chapter explores the issue of conditional, preparatory or contingent intentions of spouses with critical reference to work of John Finnis in this area.
Uploads
Papers by Anthony McCarthy
http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2017/06/19532/
http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2017/04/19251/
The argument we are discussing is based on the Principle of Double Effect and holds that use of a condom by a married couple one member of whom is HIV positive is permissible when the condom is intended to block the transmission of the virus, and blockage of the sperm and/or prevention of conception is seen as an unintended side-effect. The argument is claimed by its proponents not to require any revision in the Catholic teaching that marital contraception is not morally permissible.
We will argue, however, that the Double Effect argument fails, a failure that is especially clear given one of the stronger kinds of account of what is wrong with contraception, namely biological-unity personalist accounts. If our argument holds, the use of condoms in consensual marital sexual activity will not be permissible even when one party is HIV positive. Depending on the risks and benefits at stake for the individual couple, the couple may need to abstain from intercourse entirely and show their love in other ways.
Books by Anthony McCarthy
http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2017/06/19532/
http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2017/04/19251/
The argument we are discussing is based on the Principle of Double Effect and holds that use of a condom by a married couple one member of whom is HIV positive is permissible when the condom is intended to block the transmission of the virus, and blockage of the sperm and/or prevention of conception is seen as an unintended side-effect. The argument is claimed by its proponents not to require any revision in the Catholic teaching that marital contraception is not morally permissible.
We will argue, however, that the Double Effect argument fails, a failure that is especially clear given one of the stronger kinds of account of what is wrong with contraception, namely biological-unity personalist accounts. If our argument holds, the use of condoms in consensual marital sexual activity will not be permissible even when one party is HIV positive. Depending on the risks and benefits at stake for the individual couple, the couple may need to abstain from intercourse entirely and show their love in other ways.
Preface by Josef Seifert; Introduction; Chapter 1 Contraception as Contralife; Chapter 2 Natural Law, Functions, Teleology; Chapter 3 Marriage and Meaning; Chapter 4 Marital Willing; Chapter 5 Sexual Desire; Chapter 6 Love, Virtue and Vice; Appendix UMDAs.
The book is available from Amazon.co.uk here:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Ethical-Sex-Sexual-Choices-Meaning-y/dp/0929891171/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1462919023&sr=8-4&keywords=Anthony+McCarthy and at Amazon.com here: https://www.amazon.com/Ethical-Sex-Sexual-Choices-Meaning/dp/0929891171/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1468571533&sr=8-1&keywords=ethical+sex+mccarthy
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Abortion-Matters-Anthony-McCarthy/dp/095630561X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1526201813&sr=8-1&keywords=Abortion+MAtters