ABSTRACT
Might paternalistic interference that would otherwise be morally unjustified be justified, in virtue of one’s friendship or loving relationship to the interfered with person? This chapter argues that such intimate relationships can make a normative difference to paternalism, in virtue of some of the constitutive elements of intimate relationships. These difference-making elements include shared history, mutual knowledge and understanding, joint identification and projects, and reciprocated trust and vulnerability. Thus, the chapter argues, the presence of an intimate relationship can generate additional or stronger reasons for one to paternalistically interfere. Moreover, the presence of such a relationship can also weaken or cancel some of the presumptive reasons of respect one would otherwise have not to interfere. The discussion also reflects generally on the nature of intimate relationships, on the normative significance of paternalism, and on normative differences between paternalism in the institutional and interpersonal contexts.
