The natural rights of children

What does libertarian theory, Murray Rothbard’s theory in particular, tell us about the rights of children? The two foundational principles of Rothbardian libertarianism are the sanctity of private property and the rule of non-aggression. Persons, including children, are “self-owners”. Yet children, at a young age, are not yet capable of functioning fully as “self-owners.” They must be cared for, and the caring will necessarily involve some degree of aggression in the form of supervision and restraint. Parents and other caregivers play the role of trustees; and just as the beneficiary of a trust has the right to petition a court to change trustees or terminate the trustee relationship, so a child, able to express his preferences when it comes to the nature and degree of supervision and restraint to which he will be subjected, should equally enjoy that right while, in terms of property rights, a biological caregiver may have better “title” than an adoptive caregiver to be the child’s “trustee” given the child’s inability to express a preference for one or the other. What may seem to a contemporary sensibility as an extreme degree of childhood independence in the choice of caregivers and other freedom from supervision and restraint was common in pre-industrial America and continues to be the rule in some native culture

Educational Vouchers: Freedom to Choose?

Milton Friedman is famous for his book title: “Free to Choose.” He also favors educational vouchers, which denies the freedom to choose to people who do not wish to subsidize the education of other people’s children. Thus, he is guilty of a logical contradiction. Why is it important to assess whether Friedman’s views on educational vouchers are logically consistent with his widespread reputation as an advocate of free enterprise, and, thus, freedom to chose? It is important to assess all figures in political economy, and indeed all of scholarship, for logical consistency. It is particularly important to do so in the present case, given the prestige in certain quarters accorded to this Nobel prize-winning economist. We argue in this paper that Friedman’s reputation for logical consistency, and adherence to the philosophy of laissez faire capitalism, are both overblown. Our solution to this challenge is to completely privatize education. Friedman does not advocate that vouchers be utilized for food, clothing or shelter; we see no relevant difference in the case of education. What is the justification of the undertaken topic? This topic is important because education of the next generation is crucial for the upkeep and improvement of society. What is the aim of the present study? It is to demonstrate that the solution offered by M. Friedman and R. Friedman (1990) is highly problematic. What is the methodology used in the study? We quote from this author, and criticize his analysis. What are our main results and conclusions/recommendations? We conclude that the last best hope for the educational industry is laissez faire capitalism, not the mixed economy recommended by Friedman

The Natural Rights of Children

What does libertarian theory, Murray Rothbard’s theory in particular, tell us about the rights of children? The two foundational principles of Rothbardian libertarianism are the sanctity of private property and the rule of non-aggression. Persons, including children, are “self-owners”. Yet children, at a young age, are not yet capable of functioning fully as “self-owners.” They must be cared for, and the caring will necessarily involve some degree of aggression in the form of supervision and restraint. Parents and other caregivers play the role of trustees; and just as the beneficiary of a trust has the right to petition a court to change trustees or terminate the trustee relationship, so a child, able to express his preferences when it comes to the nature and degree of supervision and restraint to which he will be subjected, should equally enjoy that right while, in terms of property rights, a biological caregiver may have better “title” than an adoptive caregiver to be the child’s “trustee” given the child’s inability to express a preference for one or the other. What may seem to a contemporary sensibility as an extreme degree of childhood independence in the choice of caregivers and other freedom from supervision and restraint was common in pre-industrial America and continues to be the rule in some native cultures

#COVID19 and #Breastcancer: A Qualitative Analysis of Tweets

Rapid and efficient communication regarding quickly evolving medical information was paramount for healthcare providers and patients throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Over the last several years, social media platforms such as Twitter have emerged as important tools for health promotion, virtual learning among healthcare providers, and patient support. We conducted a qualitative thematic content analysis on tweets using the hashtags #BreastSurgery, #BreastCancer, #BreastOncology, #Pandemic, and #COVID19. Advocacy organizations were the most frequent authors of tweets captured in this dataset, and most tweets came from the United States of America (64%). Seventy-three codes were generated from the data, and, through iterative, inductive analysis, three major themes were developed: patient hesitancy and vulnerability, increased efforts in knowledge sharing, and evolving best practices. We found that Twitter was an effective way to share evolving best practices, education, and collective experiences among key stakeholders. As Twitter is increasingly used as a tool for health promotion and knowledge translation, a better understanding of how key stakeholders engage with healthcare-related topics on the platform can help optimize the use of this powerful tool