Literature DB >> 9549684

Freedom to box.

N Warburton1.   

Abstract

The british Medical Association wants to criminalise all boxing. This article examines the logic of the arguments it uses and finds them wanting. The move from medical evidence about the risk of brain damage to the conclusion that boxing should be banned is not warranted. The BMA's arguments are a combination of inconsistent paternalism and legal moralism. Consistent application of the principles implicit in the BMA's arguments would lead to absurd consequences and to severe limitations being put on individual freedom.

Entities:  

Keywords:  British Medical Association; Health Care and Public Health; Legal Approach

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9549684      PMCID: PMC1377433          DOI: 10.1136/jme.24.1.56

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Ethics        ISSN: 0306-6800            Impact factor:   2.903


  5 in total

Review 1.  Sport medicine and the ethics of boxing.

Authors:  S Leclerc; C D Herrera
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 13.800

2.  Sport medicine and the ethics of boxing

Authors: 
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  2000-06

3.  Problems in health management of professional boxers in Japan.

Authors:  G Ohhashi; S Tani; S Murakami; M Kamio; T Abe; J Ohtuki
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 13.800

4.  One more reader responds to "boxing should be banned in civilized countries--round 4".

Authors:  Michal R Pijak
Journal:  MedGenMed       Date:  2005-10-14

5.  Doctors should not try to ban boxing--but boxing's own ethics suggests reform.

Authors:  R Gillon
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 2.903

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.