Robert Goodin Smoking Case Study

One of the main and most important principles of the United States foundation is the protection of peoples’ rights and choices. Therefore, when a policy is drafted that limits these rights, there is bound to be discussion over its paternalistic qualities. Paternalistic public policies are generally frowned upon, but, in rare cases, restrictions have to be put in place to protect citizens’ deeper preferences (living a long, healthy life) rather than allowing them to participate in their surface preferences. Robert Goodin discusses smoking; a rare case in which a paternalistic policy could save many smokers from ruining themselves and why the policy is permissible. He proposes four different reasons as to why making paternalistic decisions about smoking is permissible. Robert Goodin’s main reason for arguing towards paternalistic policies on smoking is because smokers have conflicting preferences. Most of those who smoke desire to live a long life, like the rest of us. However, smoking is known to reduce a person’s life …show more content…
Most times a person’s judgement is greatly influenced by the things and people surrounding them, especially at younger and more vulnerable ages. Every advertisement shown on television or in magazines always depicts a subliminal message. Such as in Rose’s case, she smoked Virginia Slims because she too wanted to be a beautiful, liberated woman. When a person sees these subliminal messages, they go against their better judgement and use the product in hopes of getting something that they may have always wanted. Because of this, Goodin believes that these clouded decisions and preferences are not to be given or guaranteed the same type of respect that a person’s true preferences should be given. He states that products that can heavily influence a person’s life should have strict limitations on advertising and