One person’s freedom often requires another person’s freedom to be curtailed.

Evidence

What makes the problem more complex is that the freedom of one man almost always concerns that of other individuals. Here is a married couple who persist in living in a hovel; if one does not succeed in giving them the desire to live in a more healthful dwelling, they must be allowed to follow their preferences; but the situation changes if they have children; the freedom of the parents would be the ruin of their sons, and as freedom and the future are on the side of the latter, these are the ones who must first be taken into account. — Simone de Beauvoir, The Ethics of Ambiguity, 132

Categorization

• XREF: Directly feeds the reader’s tracking question of whether willing my freedom requires willing yours — here Beauvoir admits freedoms conflict and must be weighed. — connects to: One can act on the Other only once their freedom has collapsed. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 966; Tolerance and even abstention also violate the Other’s freedom. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 1008; Even prohibitions and coercion cannot limit freedom; only being-objectified by another can. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 1230 (+4 more)
• QUESTION: If freedoms of parent and child genuinely conflict and must be prioritized, does this complicate or contradict the later claim that willing my freedom requires willing yours?