Are healthful behavior change policies ever unethical?

Public health experts often assume that any policy promoting healthful behavior change is inherently and self-evidently ethical. This assumption is incorrect. This Viewpoint describes why evaluating the ethics of a policy to promote healthful behavior change should require (1) valuing consequences f...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of public health policy 2022-12, Vol.43 (4), p.685-695
1. Verfasser: Braithwaite, R. Scott
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 695
container_issue 4
container_start_page 685
container_title Journal of public health policy
container_volume 43
creator Braithwaite, R. Scott
description Public health experts often assume that any policy promoting healthful behavior change is inherently and self-evidently ethical. This assumption is incorrect. This Viewpoint describes why evaluating the ethics of a policy to promote healthful behavior change should require (1) valuing consequences for wellbeing proportionately to consequences for health, (2) valuing changes to the distributional equity of health and wellbeing together with their aggregate improvement, and (3) anticipating and surveilling for unintended consequences sufficiently important to offset benefits. I illustrate these three requirements through a hypothetical salt restriction policy, which is unethical if it evokes strong preferences that detract from wellbeing, disproportionately confers health benefits to those who are already healthy, or elicits unintended consequences that offset health benefits. I discuss why analogies of salt restriction mandates are inappropriate. In summary, public health decision-makers should employ more structured, explicit and comprehensive criteria when considering the ethical consequences of policies.
doi_str_mv 10.1057/s41271-022-00372-8
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9750897</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2729519377</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c355t-c315632b515b309febbdaffeb6497f741cbe501dd6d0b95b5343f4d7e116f46c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kTlPxDAQhS0EguX4AxQoEg1NwEcmjhsQQlwSEg1IdJbtTDZB2WSxk5X49xgWlqOg8RTzzfO8eYTsM3rMKMiTkDEuWUo5TykVkqfFGpkwmUGaAzytkwllSqZQKLlFtkN4ppQWjPNNsiVyXijBYULyc49JjaYd6mpsE4u1WTS9T1xtuikm875tXIMhwQX6ZOxwqBtn2rNdslGZNuDeZ90hj1eXDxc36d399e3F-V3qBMAQXwa54BYYWEFVhdaWpoolz5SsZMacRaCsLPOSWgUWRCaqrJTIWF5luRM75HSpOx_tDEuH3eBNq-e-mRn_qnvT6N-drqn1tF9oJYFG41Hg6FPA9y8jhkHPmuCwbU2H_Rg0l1wBU0K-o4d_0Od-9F20FynI4qmVZJHiS8r5PgSP1WoZRvV7LHoZi46x6I9YdBGHDn7aWI185RABsQRCbMXD---__5F9A5C5mJE</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2754271971</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Are healthful behavior change policies ever unethical?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>PAIS Index</source><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><creator>Braithwaite, R. Scott</creator><creatorcontrib>Braithwaite, R. Scott</creatorcontrib><description>Public health experts often assume that any policy promoting healthful behavior change is inherently and self-evidently ethical. This assumption is incorrect. This Viewpoint describes why evaluating the ethics of a policy to promote healthful behavior change should require (1) valuing consequences for wellbeing proportionately to consequences for health, (2) valuing changes to the distributional equity of health and wellbeing together with their aggregate improvement, and (3) anticipating and surveilling for unintended consequences sufficiently important to offset benefits. I illustrate these three requirements through a hypothetical salt restriction policy, which is unethical if it evokes strong preferences that detract from wellbeing, disproportionately confers health benefits to those who are already healthy, or elicits unintended consequences that offset health benefits. I discuss why analogies of salt restriction mandates are inappropriate. In summary, public health decision-makers should employ more structured, explicit and comprehensive criteria when considering the ethical consequences of policies.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0197-5897</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1745-655X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1057/s41271-022-00372-8</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36289325</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: Palgrave Macmillan UK</publisher><subject>Behavior ; Behavior change ; Benefits ; Calculus ; Cardiovascular disease ; Collectivism ; Decision makers ; Decision making ; Distributive justice ; Egalitarianism ; Equality and Human Rights ; Ethics ; Health care ; Health disparities ; Health Policy ; Health promotion ; Humans ; Hypertension ; Inappropriateness ; Medical Sociology ; Policies ; Policy making ; Procedural justice ; Public Health ; Salt ; Social Justice ; Social Policy ; Social Sciences ; Society ; Sociology ; Stigma ; Viewpoint ; Well being</subject><ispartof>Journal of public health policy, 2022-12, Vol.43 (4), p.685-695</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2022</rights><rights>2022. The Author(s).</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2022. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c355t-c315632b515b309febbdaffeb6497f741cbe501dd6d0b95b5343f4d7e116f46c3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-4095-0030</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1057/s41271-022-00372-8$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41271-022-00372-8$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,12846,27866,27924,27925,30999,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36289325$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Braithwaite, R. Scott</creatorcontrib><title>Are healthful behavior change policies ever unethical?</title><title>Journal of public health policy</title><addtitle>J Public Health Pol</addtitle><addtitle>J Public Health Policy</addtitle><description>Public health experts often assume that any policy promoting healthful behavior change is inherently and self-evidently ethical. This assumption is incorrect. This Viewpoint describes why evaluating the ethics of a policy to promote healthful behavior change should require (1) valuing consequences for wellbeing proportionately to consequences for health, (2) valuing changes to the distributional equity of health and wellbeing together with their aggregate improvement, and (3) anticipating and surveilling for unintended consequences sufficiently important to offset benefits. I illustrate these three requirements through a hypothetical salt restriction policy, which is unethical if it evokes strong preferences that detract from wellbeing, disproportionately confers health benefits to those who are already healthy, or elicits unintended consequences that offset health benefits. I discuss why analogies of salt restriction mandates are inappropriate. In summary, public health decision-makers should employ more structured, explicit and comprehensive criteria when considering the ethical consequences of policies.</description><subject>Behavior</subject><subject>Behavior change</subject><subject>Benefits</subject><subject>Calculus</subject><subject>Cardiovascular disease</subject><subject>Collectivism</subject><subject>Decision makers</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Distributive justice</subject><subject>Egalitarianism</subject><subject>Equality and Human Rights</subject><subject>Ethics</subject><subject>Health care</subject><subject>Health disparities</subject><subject>Health Policy</subject><subject>Health promotion</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Hypertension</subject><subject>Inappropriateness</subject><subject>Medical Sociology</subject><subject>Policies</subject><subject>Policy making</subject><subject>Procedural justice</subject><subject>Public Health</subject><subject>Salt</subject><subject>Social Justice</subject><subject>Social Policy</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><subject>Society</subject><subject>Sociology</subject><subject>Stigma</subject><subject>Viewpoint</subject><subject>Well being</subject><issn>0197-5897</issn><issn>1745-655X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kTlPxDAQhS0EguX4AxQoEg1NwEcmjhsQQlwSEg1IdJbtTDZB2WSxk5X49xgWlqOg8RTzzfO8eYTsM3rMKMiTkDEuWUo5TykVkqfFGpkwmUGaAzytkwllSqZQKLlFtkN4ppQWjPNNsiVyXijBYULyc49JjaYd6mpsE4u1WTS9T1xtuikm875tXIMhwQX6ZOxwqBtn2rNdslGZNuDeZ90hj1eXDxc36d399e3F-V3qBMAQXwa54BYYWEFVhdaWpoolz5SsZMacRaCsLPOSWgUWRCaqrJTIWF5luRM75HSpOx_tDEuH3eBNq-e-mRn_qnvT6N-drqn1tF9oJYFG41Hg6FPA9y8jhkHPmuCwbU2H_Rg0l1wBU0K-o4d_0Od-9F20FynI4qmVZJHiS8r5PgSP1WoZRvV7LHoZi46x6I9YdBGHDn7aWI185RABsQRCbMXD---__5F9A5C5mJE</recordid><startdate>20221201</startdate><enddate>20221201</enddate><creator>Braithwaite, R. Scott</creator><general>Palgrave Macmillan UK</general><general>Palgrave Macmillan</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>HEHIP</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4095-0030</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20221201</creationdate><title>Are healthful behavior change policies ever unethical?</title><author>Braithwaite, R. Scott</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c355t-c315632b515b309febbdaffeb6497f741cbe501dd6d0b95b5343f4d7e116f46c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Behavior</topic><topic>Behavior change</topic><topic>Benefits</topic><topic>Calculus</topic><topic>Cardiovascular disease</topic><topic>Collectivism</topic><topic>Decision makers</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Distributive justice</topic><topic>Egalitarianism</topic><topic>Equality and Human Rights</topic><topic>Ethics</topic><topic>Health care</topic><topic>Health disparities</topic><topic>Health Policy</topic><topic>Health promotion</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Hypertension</topic><topic>Inappropriateness</topic><topic>Medical Sociology</topic><topic>Policies</topic><topic>Policy making</topic><topic>Procedural justice</topic><topic>Public Health</topic><topic>Salt</topic><topic>Social Justice</topic><topic>Social Policy</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><topic>Society</topic><topic>Sociology</topic><topic>Stigma</topic><topic>Viewpoint</topic><topic>Well being</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Braithwaite, R. Scott</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Sociology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Sociology Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of public health policy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Braithwaite, R. Scott</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Are healthful behavior change policies ever unethical?</atitle><jtitle>Journal of public health policy</jtitle><stitle>J Public Health Pol</stitle><addtitle>J Public Health Policy</addtitle><date>2022-12-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>43</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>685</spage><epage>695</epage><pages>685-695</pages><issn>0197-5897</issn><eissn>1745-655X</eissn><abstract>Public health experts often assume that any policy promoting healthful behavior change is inherently and self-evidently ethical. This assumption is incorrect. This Viewpoint describes why evaluating the ethics of a policy to promote healthful behavior change should require (1) valuing consequences for wellbeing proportionately to consequences for health, (2) valuing changes to the distributional equity of health and wellbeing together with their aggregate improvement, and (3) anticipating and surveilling for unintended consequences sufficiently important to offset benefits. I illustrate these three requirements through a hypothetical salt restriction policy, which is unethical if it evokes strong preferences that detract from wellbeing, disproportionately confers health benefits to those who are already healthy, or elicits unintended consequences that offset health benefits. I discuss why analogies of salt restriction mandates are inappropriate. In summary, public health decision-makers should employ more structured, explicit and comprehensive criteria when considering the ethical consequences of policies.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>Palgrave Macmillan UK</pub><pmid>36289325</pmid><doi>10.1057/s41271-022-00372-8</doi><tpages>11</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4095-0030</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0197-5897
ispartof Journal of public health policy, 2022-12, Vol.43 (4), p.685-695
issn 0197-5897
1745-655X
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9750897
source MEDLINE; PAIS Index; SpringerNature Journals; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)
subjects Behavior
Behavior change
Benefits
Calculus
Cardiovascular disease
Collectivism
Decision makers
Decision making
Distributive justice
Egalitarianism
Equality and Human Rights
Ethics
Health care
Health disparities
Health Policy
Health promotion
Humans
Hypertension
Inappropriateness
Medical Sociology
Policies
Policy making
Procedural justice
Public Health
Salt
Social Justice
Social Policy
Social Sciences
Society
Sociology
Stigma
Viewpoint
Well being
title Are healthful behavior change policies ever unethical?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T02%3A52%3A14IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Are%20healthful%20behavior%20change%20policies%20ever%20unethical?&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20public%20health%20policy&rft.au=Braithwaite,%20R.%20Scott&rft.date=2022-12-01&rft.volume=43&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=685&rft.epage=695&rft.pages=685-695&rft.issn=0197-5897&rft.eissn=1745-655X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1057/s41271-022-00372-8&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2729519377%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2754271971&rft_id=info:pmid/36289325&rfr_iscdi=true