Selection, Ignorability and Challenges With Causal Fairness
  In this paper we look at popular fairness methods that use causal
counterfactuals. These methods capture the intuitive notion that a prediction
is fair if it coincides with the prediction that would have been made if
someone's race, gender or religion were counterfactually different. In order to
achieve this, we must have causal models that are able to capture what someone
would be like if we were to counterfactually change these traits. However, we
argue that any model that can do this must lie outside the particularly well
behaved class that is commonly considered in the fairness literature. This is
because in fairness settings, models in this class entail a particularly strong
causal assumption, normally only seen in a randomised controlled trial. We
argue that in general this is unlikely to hold. Furthermore, we show in many
cases it can be explicitly rejected due to the fact that samples are selected
from a wider population. We show this creates difficulties for counterfactual
fairness as well as for the application of more general causal fairness
methods.
