The book defines and critically discusses the following five principles: the harm principle, legal paternalism, the offense principle, legal moralism and the dignity principle of criminalization. The book argues that all five principles raise important problems that point to rejections (or at least a rethink) of standard principles of criminalization. The book shows that one of the reasons why we should reject or revise standard principles of criminalization is that even the most plausible versions of the harm principle and legal paternalism that have been offered so far are rendered redundant by general moral theories. Furthermore, it demonstrates that the other three principles (or versions thereof), the offense principle, legal moralism and the dignity principle of criminalization, can either be covered by the harm principle, thus making these principles also redundant, or be seen to have what look like other unacceptable implications (e.g. that versions of legal moralism are based on speculative and incorrect empirical assumptions or violate what is called the criminological levelling-down challenge). As such, there is reason to move beyond traditional principles of criminalization, and instead to investigate alternative principles the state should be guided by when attempting to justify which kinds of conduct should be criminalized. Moreover, this book presents and defends such a principle - the utilitarian principle of criminalization.

In this provocative and thought-provoking book, Professor of Ethics Thomas Sobirk Petersen explains why the World Anti-Doping Agency's doping rules are poorly justified and makes a case for a new third way in anti-doping policy that would allow athletes to use substances and methods currently on WADA's prohibited list. The book identifies, clarifies and challenges the central arguments that are used in the often highly emotional debates around doping, and argues strongly that open dialogue about doping is essential as it defines the territory in which athletes, physicians, managers, coaches and pharmaceutical companies can operate safely. It is rooted in the theory of ethics and illustrated with real cases, examples and experiences from sport at all levels, from the auto-biographical to some of the most high-profile doping cases in history. This is an essential addition to the bookshelves of researchers and students of sports studies like sports philosophy, sports law, sports medicine and the sociology of sport, and a fascinating read for anybody interested in the darker side of sport and in its possible futures.

In this provocative and thought-provoking book, Professor of Ethics Thomas Sobirk Petersen explains why the World Anti-Doping Agency's doping rules are poorly justified and makes a case for a new third way in anti-doping policy that would allow athletes to use substances and methods currently on WADA's prohibited list. The book identifies, clarifies and challenges the central arguments that are used in the often highly emotional debates around doping, and argues strongly that open dialogue about doping is essential as it defines the territory in which athletes, physicians, managers, coaches and pharmaceutical companies can operate safely. It is rooted in the theory of ethics and illustrated with real cases, examples and experiences from sport at all levels, from the auto-biographical to some of the most high-profile doping cases in history. This is an essential addition to the bookshelves of researchers and students of sports studies like sports philosophy, sports law, sports medicine and the sociology of sport, and a fascinating read for anybody interested in the darker side of sport and in its possible futures.

The book defines and critically discusses the following five principles: the harm principle, legal paternalism, the offense principle, legal moralism and the dignity principle of criminalization. The book argues that all five principles raise important problems that point to rejections (or at least a rethink) of standard principles of criminalization. The book shows that one of the reasons why we should reject or revise standard principles of criminalization is that even the most plausible versions of the harm principle and legal paternalism that have been offered so far are rendered redundant by general moral theories. Furthermore, it demonstrates that the other three principles (or versions thereof), the offense principle, legal moralism and the dignity principle of criminalization, can either be covered by the harm principle, thus making these principles also redundant, or be seen to have what look like other unacceptable implications (e.g. that versions of legal moralism are based on speculative and incorrect empirical assumptions or violate what is called the criminological levelling-down challenge). As such, there is reason to move beyond traditional principles of criminalization, and instead to investigate alternative principles the state should be guided by when attempting to justify which kinds of conduct should be criminalized. Moreover, this book presents and defends such a principle - the utilitarian principle of criminalization.

Reproduction has entered a new ice age: the ability to cryopreserve reproductive cells, tissue and embryos are fundamentally changing our understanding of what it means to be a reproductive citizen. This book explores the ways in which visions of desirable reproductive futures entangle with advances in freezing technologies, with the authors situating their discussions of cryo-fertility within the Scandinavian region, asking: * How does cryopreservation help mobilize particular understandings of reproductive time, reproductive rights and reproductive autonomy? * What values are embedded within Scandinavian laws that seek to regulate cryo-technologies? * How are frozen states enacted in clinical settings and how do the women and men who freeze imagine the preservation of reproductive parts? These questions demand a collaborative approach. The authors empirically cut across the arenas of bioethics/law, practices/experiences, and culture/commerce in order to pin down often complex and far-reaching answers.