No right to an open future

Joseph Millum*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Liberals writing about the family frequently cite the child's ‘right to an open future’ in discussions of the ethics of parental decision-making for young children. This purported right grounds certain claims on behalf of children in considerations related to their future autonomy. In this article, I argue that there is no compelling argument in favor of a distinctive ‘right to an open future’ construed as either a negative or a positive right. Insofar as claims made about the content of this purported right are justified, they can be grounded in the interests of the child or in other uncontroversial rights. Talk of a ‘right to an open future’ serves only to obscure the ethical considerations that actually matter and citing the right is not helpful in deciding what may or should be done. I illustrate this claim by reference to two examples of how the ‘right to an open future’ has been applied: one regarding genetic testing for adult-onset disorders and one regarding selection for disabilities.
Original languageEnglish
Number of pages16
JournalJournal of Applied Philosophy
VolumeEarly View
Early online date12 Jan 2025
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 12 Jan 2025

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'No right to an open future'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this