Some accounts of coercion apply a moralized test to the coercee's situation, holding that one may avoid responsibility for an act taken under coercion if the coercer's proposal is such that one "is entitled to yield to [the coercer's] proposal and then be released from the normal moral and legal consequences of [one's] act" (Wertheimer 1987, 267).
In sum, the ordinary person's view, as Bradley presents it, is Aristotelian: for the purposes of determining moral responsibility an act has to be the agent's in that its origin (arche) lies with or in the agent in some sense and the agent must not be acting under coercion or in a state of non-culpable ignorance.
Coercion involves a strategic and dynamic interaction between two agents — coercer and coercee — and the standard used to judge the coercee's responsibility for acting under coercion can affect that strategic situation.
The children involved are victims, acting under coercion.
Inconveniently, neither sort of justification engages smoothly with most recent theories of coercion that may be used to determine agent responsibility for acts performed under coercion.
Ms. Pryce maintained that she had acted under "marital coercion" and underwent two trials in quick succession.
But if coercion is necessarily immoral action, then it is hard to explain how an act of coercion could count as justified.[26] Among other implications, this view is in apparent contradiction with the traditional approach to coercion which treats states as paradigmatically, even necessarily users of coercion.
Authorities speculated that this attack had been an act of criminal coercion directed at the owner of the parking lot.
If there exist such conventions based on natural facts that invest acts of coercion with such meaning, what will guarantee that such conventions only countenance coercion when used against harmful behaviour, not when used against (harmless) immoral or worthless behaviour?
And I have doubts about the likelihood of our government never repeating these acts of coercion, even brutality.
Many of the participants who had long histories of being under coercion described a gradual transition from resistance to medication toward developing a therapeutic alliance with the ACT-teams, based on an ongoing dialogue about how to address unmet needs and future goals.
