Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Individual and human rights in tobacco control: help or hindrance?
Free
  1. B J Fox1,
  2. J E Katz2
  1. 1University of Wisconsin Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
  2. 2Department of Communication, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA
  1. Correspondence to:
 Brion J Fox
 University of Wisconsin Comprehensive Cancer Center, 385 WARF, 610 Walnut Street, Madison, WI 53726, USA; bjfoxuwccc.wisc.edu

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Rights based arguments are a vital and increasingly important aspect of modern society, but are they vital in the framing and implementation of tobacco control policy and advocacy? Most experts would say yes in principle. Yet, it is less clear what and how much of a role rights should play in the policy declarations, in the training of volunteers, and in the rhetoric of advocacy. In part, the answer depends on one’s perception of rights, which could include individualistic, communitarian, or human rights, each with vastly different implications for policy and behaviour. But even with a common understanding of what is meant by rights, the application of rights arguments in policy contexts is elusive and requires analysis at several levels—from the abstract to the practical. For example, if rights form the foundation upon which tobacco control advocacy can or should be based, how explicit should the use of rights language be in our communications with various stakeholders? Alternatively, if rights do not form the foundation of our movement, what should? And what would it mean for the moral stature of the movement if human or individual rights were …

View Full Text