The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Global health, law and ethics: Fragmented sovereignty and the limits of universal theory

Global health, law and ethics: Fragmented sovereignty and the limits of universal theory
Global health, law and ethics: Fragmented sovereignty and the limits of universal theory
The quotation that heads this chapter, taken from one of David Fidler’s manycontributions to debates on global health, captures the burden of my inquiry and the complexities that I wish to examine as a preliminary study of the roles and relationships of law and ethics in relation to global health. As Fidler makes clear, there is no difficulty in establishing that law is an important practical and normative tool in efforts to safeguard health (even whilst we should note that heated argument is inevitable on the legitimate bounds and basis of law’s role in so doing).2 The difficult matter in global health is not establishing that law (and other formalized modes of governance) would have a role to play in optimizing good health outcomes, ensuring greater equity internationally, protecting against abuses of power, and so on. Rather, it is in finding the legal or quasi-legal mechanisms that might be employed to afford law a practical role to play. As Fidler makes clear, that question can only be answered given an inquiryin politics.3
369-385
Oxford University Press
Coggon, John
192d1511-cd81-45f4-8748-c398b74949b9
Coggon, John
192d1511-cd81-45f4-8748-c398b74949b9

Coggon, John (2014) Global health, law and ethics: Fragmented sovereignty and the limits of universal theory. In, Law and Global Health: Current Legal Issues. Oxford University Press, pp. 369-385.

Record type: Book Section

Abstract

The quotation that heads this chapter, taken from one of David Fidler’s manycontributions to debates on global health, captures the burden of my inquiry and the complexities that I wish to examine as a preliminary study of the roles and relationships of law and ethics in relation to global health. As Fidler makes clear, there is no difficulty in establishing that law is an important practical and normative tool in efforts to safeguard health (even whilst we should note that heated argument is inevitable on the legitimate bounds and basis of law’s role in so doing).2 The difficult matter in global health is not establishing that law (and other formalized modes of governance) would have a role to play in optimizing good health outcomes, ensuring greater equity internationally, protecting against abuses of power, and so on. Rather, it is in finding the legal or quasi-legal mechanisms that might be employed to afford law a practical role to play. As Fidler makes clear, that question can only be answered given an inquiryin politics.3

Text
Global_Health_Law_and_EthicsFragmented_Sovereignty_and_the_Limits_of_Universal_Theory - Version of Record
Restricted to Repository staff only

More information

Published date: 29 May 2014

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 429066
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/429066
PURE UUID: c60b3ca2-72dd-4b94-a379-ad69dca38012

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 20 Mar 2019 17:30
Last modified: 16 Mar 2024 00:50

Export record

Contributors

Author: John Coggon

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×