Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 28
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Cowden, Mhairi 2016. Children’s Rights.

    Mulgan, Tim 2016. International Encyclopedia of Ethics.

    Palacios-González, César 2016. Mitochondrial replacement techniques: egg donation, genealogy and eugenics. Monash Bioethics Review,

    Roberts, Rodney C. 2016. Are Some of the Things Faculty Do to Maximize Their Student Evaluation of Teachers Scores Unethical?. Journal of Academic Ethics, Vol. 14, Issue. 2, p. 133.

    Gustafsson, Johan E. 2015. Sequential dominance and the anti-aggregation principle. Philosophical Studies, Vol. 172, Issue. 6, p. 1593.

    Sparrow, Robert 2015. Imposing Genetic Diversity. The American Journal of Bioethics, Vol. 15, Issue. 6, p. 2.

    Sreekumar, Sandeep 2015. Some Conceptual Aspects of Temporality and the Ability to Possess Rights. Ratio Juris, Vol. 28, Issue. 3, p. 330.

    Williams, Nicola J. and Harris, John 2014. What is the harm in harmful conception? On threshold harms in non-identity cases. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, Vol. 35, Issue. 5, p. 337.

    Bayne, Tim 2013. International Encyclopedia of Ethics.

    Hanser, Matthew 2013. International Encyclopedia of Ethics.

    Mulgan, Tim 2013. International Encyclopedia of Ethics.

    Pennings, Guido 2013. Medical Tourism and Transnational Health Care.

    Cowden, M. 2012. 'No Harm, no Foul': A Child's Right to Know their Genetic Parents. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, Vol. 26, Issue. 1, p. 102.

    Davidson, Marc D. 2012. Intergenerational Justice: How Reasonable Man Discounts Climate Damage. Sustainability, Vol. 4, Issue. 12, p. 106.

    Shiffrin, Seana Valentine 2012. HARM AND ITS MORAL SIGNIFICANCE. Legal Theory, Vol. 18, Issue. 03, p. 357.

    Wrigley, Anthony 2012. Harm to Future Persons: Non-Identity Problems and Counterpart Solutions. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, Vol. 15, Issue. 2, p. 175.

    Yeates, James 2012. Quality Time: Temporal and Other Aspects of Ethical Principles Based on a “Life Worth Living”. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, Vol. 25, Issue. 4, p. 607.

    Boorse, Christopher 2011. Philosophy of Medicine.

    SPARROW, ROBERT 2011. A Not-So-New Eugenics. Hastings Center Report, Vol. 41, Issue. 1, p. 32.

    Wilkinson, Dominic James 2011. A Life Worth Giving? The Threshold for Permissible Withdrawal of Life Support From Disabled Newborn Infants. The American Journal of Bioethics, Vol. 11, Issue. 2, p. 20.


Wrongful Life and the Counterfactual Element in Harming

  • Joel Feinberg (a1)
  • DOI:
  • Published online: 01 January 2009

I shall be concerned in this paper with some philosophical puzzles raised by so-called “wrongful life” suits. These legal actions are obviously of great interest to lawyers and physicians, but philosophers might have a kind of professional interest in them too, since in a remarkably large number of them, judges have complained that the issues are too abstruse for the courts and belong more properly to philosophers and theologians. The issues that elicit this judicial frustration are those that require the application to border-line cases of such philosophically interesting concepts as acting, causing, and the one that especially interests me, harming.

I first became interested in the concept of harming in my work on the moral limits of the criminal law, where I had to come to terms with John Stuart Mill's famous “harm principle”–the principle that it is always a good reason in support of a criminal prohibition, indeed, the only legitimate reason, that it will prevent harm to persons other than the actor. I could not very well criticize that principle until I decided what the word “harm” must mean in its formulation. I gave what I took to be the requisite analysis of harm in my book Harm to Others. Here I wish to improve that analysis, examine its implications for civil as well as criminal liability, and test it on conceptually hard cases, especially cases of prenatal harming, that is, cases in which the wrongful causative conduct occurs before the victim's birth, and the harmed state that is its upshot consists in being born in an impaired condition.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Social Philosophy and Policy
  • ISSN: 0265-0525
  • EISSN: 1471-6437
  • URL: /core/journals/social-philosophy-and-policy
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *