Abstract
In her debate with Michael Blake, Gillian Brock sets out to justify emigration restrictions on medical workers from poor states on the basis of their free-riding on the public investment that their states have made in them in form of a publicly funded education. For this purpose, Brock aims to isolate the question of emigration restrictions from the larger question of responsibilities for remedying global inequalities. I argue that this approach is misguided because it is blind to decisive factors at play in the problem of medical brain drain and consequently distorts the different responsibilities this problem generates. Brock’s strategy, if successful, would effectively lead to punishing emigrating workers from poor states for the free-riding and exploitation that is committed by affluent states – which is a counter-intuitive result.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 67-81 |
| Number of pages | 14 |
| Journal | Moral Philosophy and Politics |
| Volume | 3 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 8 Mar 2016 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 10 Reduced Inequalities
Keywords
- Medical Brain Drain
- Free-Riding
- Reciprocity
- Exploitation
- Global Migration
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Medical Brain Drain: Free-Riding, Exploitation, and Global Justice'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver