Coercion

Abstract

This entry provides a standard characterization of coercion and its main alternatives and illustrates its contemporary applications in global bioethics. Coercion is defined as a mode of influence that operates by threats and force; aims at controlling the recipient’s being, movement, or will; and leaves, at least initially, its recipient disadvantaged. Coercion is seen, in liberal traditions, as morally wrong insofar as it restricts its recipients’ freedom or liberty or violates their autonomy. This can be interpreted in as many ways as there are definitions of freedom, liberty, and autonomy. In non-liberal traditions, coercion is morally wrong only if its practices or consequences are bad.

When the use of threats and force is discussed in global bioethics, it is important to recognize the complexity of the concept. Coercion does not always occur where it is thought to occur, it does sometimes take place where it is not normally seen to take place, and it is not automatically bad. What is called involuntary treatment may not be truly involuntary, explicit coercion by the state may be quite legitimate, and analyses of intimidation, deception, and exploitation can offer insights that challenge initial beliefs. Ethical considerations must be open to diverse background ideas that lead different people to different conclusions.