The Vice of In-Principlism and the Harmfulness of Love

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

Notes

Earp and colleagues’ (2013) stated aim is to analyze a best case scenario for intervention, then proceed from there to more problematic cases. Hence, their framework is not intended to identify the only circumstances in which interventions are permissible—just the most obvious ones.

Disruption of the attachment mechanism is less readily available at the moment, as Earp and colleagues point out.

Earp and colleagues are, of course, aware of these examples, which makes it all the more puzzling that they don't address them in their proposed ethical framework.