(work in progress)
philosophers and legal scholars alike have continuously plagued their mind through the ages over the idea of parens patriae, or the idea that the government should act as the “parent of a nation”; that it step in as the legal guardian or parent of its people where and when it is deemed necessary. although this idea in modern criminal law generally applies to child custody cases–where a child with no/indeterminate/inappropriate guardian is placed under the custody of government protection/intervention (i.e. social services)–the idea of the government presiding as a “parent” of its citizens when deemed necessary, or involuntarily making decisions regarding the welfare of its citizens where citizens are deemed unable to do so, is not an unfamiliar concept to the mind of any legal scholar.
whereas this issue can be further expanded to apply to other theoretical fields of legal and political science (i.e. the liberty vs. security debate, federalism vs. republicanism and etc.) and be elaborated upon in many articulate and florid ways pertinent to the field of law, one limerick of a “lighter vein” seems to explain this issue best:
My doctor has made a prognosis
That intercourse fosters thrombosis
But I’d rather expire
Fulfilling desire
Than abstain, and develop neurosis.