Rights theory: rights, duties and their limits
- Theory
A right is a justified claim that binds others; every right has a matching duty held by someone.
What it is
Rights theories explain morality in terms of what each person can legitimately demand of others or of the State. The jurist Wesley Hohfeld distinguished four elements of a right: the privilege (having no duty to refrain), the claim (being able to demand something of another, who has the correlative duty), the power (being able to change a legal position, for example by consenting) and the immunity (another cannot change one's own position). Negative rights ask for non-interference (not being touched without consent); positive rights ask for a provision (receiving health care). There are two theories about what rights do: the will theory (a right gives control over another's duty) and the interest theory (a right protects important interests). Ronald Dworkin described rights as «trumps» over social goals; Robert Nozick, as side constraints on the pursuit of good outcomes. This page goes deeper than the summary in «Ethical theories in brief».
Core ideas
- Privilege (liberty): the holder has no duty to refrain from something.
- Claim: the holder can demand an action or omission from another; the other has the correlative duty.
- Power: the holder can change their own or another's position (consenting, waiving, delegating).
- Immunity: another has no power to change the holder's position.
- Rights as trumps (Dworkin) or as side constraints (Nozick): they limit what may be done for the common good.
Hohfeld's four elements in the clinic
| Element | Correlative | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Privilege | No-claim of another | The patient is free to ask for a second opinion |
| Claim | Duty of another | The patient can demand confidentiality; the doctor has the duty to keep it |
| Power | Liability of another | By consenting, the patient authorises surgery |
| Immunity | Disability of another | No one can waive, on behalf of a patient with capacity, their right to decide |
In clinical practice
- The right to refuse treatment is a strong negative right: no one may impose an intervention on a patient with capacity.
- The right to health is positive: it requires someone (the State, the insurer, the provider) to provide services, within resource limits.
- Consenting is exercising a power: the patient changes the situation and permits what would otherwise be an assault.
- Patients' rights come with duties (self-care, proper use of resources, good faith), as Law 1751 of 2015 (art. 10) sets out.
Criticisms and limits
- The will theory struggles to explain the rights of those who cannot decide (infants, unconscious people).
- The interest theory does not explain why not every important interest gives rise to a right.
- Positive rights need institutions to settle who must meet them and how far.
- A language of rights alone can make the doctor-patient relationship adversarial and forget virtues and care.
- Law 1751 of 2015: art. 2 (health as an autonomous, unwaivable fundamental right), art. 10 (people's rights and duties); official text checked on 2026-11-05 in the Función Pública Gestor Normativo.
Test yourself
Think of the answer, then tap the question to see it.
What does it mean that rights and duties are correlative?
Every claim-right of one person is matched by a duty of another, for example the right to confidentiality and the doctor's duty to keep it.
What is the difference between a negative and a positive right?
A negative right asks for non-interference (refusing treatment); a positive right asks for a provision (receiving health care).
What did Dworkin describe by calling rights «trumps»?
That rights can prevail over social goals, such as increasing overall welfare.
Which law recognises health as an autonomous fundamental right in Colombia?
Statutory Law 1751 of 2015, art. 2.
Connections
Educational content on ethics and health law; not legal advice. Laws and case law change: each page links the official text and says when it was last checked. For a real case, read the text in force and ask a lawyer or the medical ethics tribunal.
Sources: Rights (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2025); Ley Estatutaria 1751 de 2015 (Función Pública, Gestor Normativo, 2015); Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (UNESCO, 2005).
Spotted a mistake?We are always improving for the community. Tell us what is wrong and our team will review it.Report a mistake
Representative model, for educational purposes only.