Child safety, absolute risk, and the prevention paradox

dc.contributor.authorSchwartz, Peter H.
dc.date.accessioned2015-10-04T02:12:48Z
dc.date.available2015-10-04T02:12:48Z
dc.date.issued2012
dc.description.abstractWhile child-saftey proposals aim to improve child safety, their possible impact is unclear since there’s been so little discussion of the amount of absolute risk and risk reduction involved in each. And while precise figures are lacking, rough estimates indicate that the magnitudes are quite small. I will argue that this risk and benefit data raises important questions about the proposals, including whether parents might reasonably believe that the small absolute risk reduction offered by the proposed changes does not justify the attendant burdens. This possibility – termed the “prevention paradox” in other contexts – highlights ethical and theoretical challenges in this area of public health.en_US
dc.identifier.citationSchwartz, P. H. (2012). Child safety, absolute risk, and the prevention paradox. The Hastings Center Report, 42(4), 20–23. http://doi.org/10.1002/hast.37en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/hast.37
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1805/7171
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.subjectRisken_US
dc.subjectPublic Policyen_US
dc.subjectCost-Benefit Analysisen_US
dc.subjectChild Restraint Systemsen_US
dc.subjectBioethicsen_US
dc.titleChild safety, absolute risk, and the prevention paradoxen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
schwartz-2012-child.pdf
Size:
429.37 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Article
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.88 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: