Judging capacity: paternalism and the risk-related standard

There is a strong academic and medical consensus on judging patients' decision-making capacity in accordance with the seriousness of consequent risks, and this is supported in certain areas of the law. Supporters of the risk-related standard perceive an asymmetry between the level of capacity required for consent to a treatment, and the level required to competently refuse the treatment, particularly if the probable outcome of refusal is death. Despite the intuitive appeal of the risk-related standard, its opponents propose that when the risks of treatment or treatment-refusal are high, we should not require a higher standard of capacity, but be scrupulous in ensuring that a procedural standard is observed. This article considers both standards, from the point of view of the persons, interests and principles which ethics and the law seek to protect. It argues that a risk-related standard is incoherent, that a rigorously applied procedural standard will minimise paternalistic medical interventions, and that this should be reflected in the law.     

The employment of finance in small business

Small‐scale businessmen everywhere, and particularly in developing countries, believe that their most pressing problem, if not their only one, is lack of finance. Organisations devoted to the promotion of small business have come to believe that finance must be accompanied by management advice. It is suggested that such advice should in fact precede any consideration of financial assistance; this will not only improve the chances of effective use of the additional finance, if it is eventually provided, but, more important still, it may show that there is in fact no need for more capital at all.     

Moral Economese of Scale? Crisis,Discursive Change and the Varying Authority of Economists

This article examines the varying authority in contemporary governance of 10 prominent economists trained and based in America during the most recent period of economic instability. Despite stemming from diverse backgrounds and adopting a variety of roles, these private actors have each increasingly sought to combine moral authority with the technical authority that has been widely challenged since the outbreak of financial crisis in 2007. The shift from esoteric scientific jargons of economese towards more explicit engagements with overtly ethical issues in a moral economese is identified as an important discursive change through which these actors sought to reconfigure their contested authority. Yet this article maintains that persistent prioritisation of market values impedes rather than supports such attempts to reassert authority. Blends of technical and moral forms of authority are considered highly unstable and not conducive to enhancing the authority of these and other prominent private actors in global governance.