Disability and interdependence. A proposal based on the feminist ethics of care
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9584-2026v34n199489Keywords:
Disability, Stigmatization, Interdependence, Vulnerability, Ethics of careAbstract
The objective of this article is to show how the stigmas around disability, based on the premise that human beings are determined by their individual autonomy and independence, can be demystified by the ethics of care. In that sense, the thesis defended by authors such as Eva Kittay, Carol Gilligan, and Joan Tronto allows us to stand out that people are characterized, especially, for their interdependence, vulnerability, and need for care.
Downloads
References
García Parada, Claudia. “La vulnerabilidad como resignificación de la identidad en Eva Feder Kittay” en: Autor, Ortega y Solano (coord). Voces al margen: mujeres en la filosofía, cultura y arte. México, Editorial notas universitarias, 2020, p. 117-147.
AGAR, Nicolas. “Why We Should Defend Gene Editing as Eugenics”. Cambridge Querterly of Healthcare Ethics, 28, 2019, p. 9-19.
ALVARADO GARCÍA, Alejandra. “La ética del cuidado”, en Aquichan, 14(1), 2004, p. 30-39.
ARNEIL, Barbara (2009). “Self Image and Modern Political Theory”, en: Political Theory, 37 (2), pp. 218-242.
BARNES, Elizabeth. “Valuing Disability, Causing Disability”, en: Ethics, 125(1), 2014, p. 88-113.
BENHABIB, Seyla. “Una revisión del debate sobre las mujeres y la teoría moral”, en: Isegoría, 6, 1992, p. 37-63.
BOSTROM, Nick; VITA-MORE, Natasha. The Transhumanist Reader. Oxford: Wiley-Blackward, 2013.
BURGORGUE- LARSEN, Laurence (2014). “La vulnerabilidad comprendida desde la filosofía, la sociología y el derecho. De la necesidad de un diálogo interdisciplinario”, en: Revista Nueva Época, 1, 2014, p. 121-132.
CAMPBELL, Fiona Kumari. “Refusing Able(ness): A Preliminary Conversation about Ableism”, en: M/C Journal, 11 (3), 2008, s/p.
DANIELS, Norman. Just Health. Meeting Health Needs Fairly, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.
DENEEN, Patrick. ¿Por qué ha fracasado el liberalismo? Santiago de Chile: RIALP, 2019.
DUPRÉ, Catherine. The Age of Dignity: Human Rights and Constitutionalism in Europe. Portland, OR: Hart, 2015.
ELLIS, Katie; GARLAND-THOMSON, Rosemarie; KENT, Mike. Manifestos for the future of critical disability studies. Routledge, 2019.
EVANS, Peter (2002). “Collective Capabilities, Culture and Amartya Sen´s Development as Freedom”, en Studies in Comparative International Development, XXXVII (2), 2002, p. 54-60.
ETXEBERRÍA, Xabier. “Naturaleza humana y discapacidad intelectual”, en: Revista Portuguesa de Filosofía, 68 (4), 2012, p. 673-692.
GILLIGAN, Carol. In a Different Voice. Psychological Theory of Women´s Development. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1982.
GOFFMAN, Erving. Estigma. La identidad deteriorada, Buenos Aires: Amorrortu, 2006.
GORE, Charles. “Irreducibly Social Goods and the Informational Basis of Amartya Sen´s Capability Approach”, en: Journal of International Development, IX, 1997, p. 235-250.
HABERMAS, Jürgen. El futuro de la naturaleza humana: ¿Hacia una eugenesia liberal? Barcelona: Paidos, 2002.
HONNETH, Axel, La lucha por el reconocimiento. Barcelona: Grijalbo, 1997.
HORKHEIMER, Max. Crítica de la razón instrumental. Madrid: Trotta, 2016.
JORGENSEN, Gunnar. “Kohlberg and Gilligan: duet or duel?” en Journal of Moral Education, 35(2), 2006, p. 179-196.
KYMLICKA, Will. “Human Rights withouth Human Supremacism”, en: Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 48(9), 2018, p. 763-792.
KITTAY, Eva. Love´s labor. Essays on Equality, Women and Dependency. New York: Routledge, 2009.
KITTAY, Eva. “When Caring is Just and Justice is Caring: Justice and Mental Retardation, en: Public Culture, 13 (3), 2001, p. 557-579.
KITTAY, Eva Federer, Jennings, Bruce, & Wasunna, Angela. A. “Dependency, Difference and the Global Ethic of Longterm Care”, en The Journal of Political Philosophy, Vol. 13, núm. 4. Nueva York, SUNY, Stony Brook, 2005, p. 443-469.
KITTAY, Eva Federer. “The Ethics of Care, Dependence and Disability”, en Ratio Juris, Vol. 24, núm. 1. Oxford, Blackwell Publishing, 2011, p. 49-58.
KITTAY, Eva Federer. “Getting from Here to There: Claiming Justice for the Severely Cognitively Disabled”, en M. Battin y A. Silvers A. (eds.), Medicine and Social Justice: Essays on the Distribution of Health Care, 2a. ed., Nueva York, Oxford University Press, 2012, p. 313-324.
KITTAY, Eva Federer, “Caring for The Long Haul: Long-term Care Needs and The (Moral) Failure to Acknowledge Them”, en International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics, Vol. 6, núm. 2. Special. Issue on Aging and Long-Term Care, University of Toronto Press, 2013, p. 66-88.
KITTAY, Eva Feder. Learning from My Daughter: The Value and Care of Disabled Minds, Oxford University Press, 2019.
LÓPEZ CALERA, Nicolás. ¿Hay derechos colectivos?: individualidad y socialidad en la teoría de los derechos, Barcelona: Arial, 2000.
LAUGIER, Sandra. “La vulnérabilité des formes de vie”, en: Raisons politiques, 57, 2015, p. 65-80.
MANENT, Pierre. Curso de Filosofía Política. Santiago de Chile: IES, 2016.
Murphy, John Michael; Gilligan, Carol. Moral development in late adolescence and adulthood: A critique and reconstruction of Kohlberg’s theory. Human development, 23(2),1980, 77-104.
NUSSBAUM, Martha & SEN, Amartya (eds). The Quality of Life, Oxford: Clarendon, 1993.
NUSSBAUM, Martha. Las fronteras de la justicia: consideraciones sobre la exclusión, Barcelona: Paidós, 2007.
NUSSBAUM, Martha. Crear Capacidades, Barcelona: Paidós, 2012.
PALACIOS, Agustina. El modelo social de discapacidad: orígenes, caracterización y plasmación en la Convención Internacional sobre los Derechos de las Personas con Discapacidad, Madrid: Grupo editorial CINCA, 2008.
PARKS, Jennifer. “Care Ethics and the Global Practice of Commercial Surrogacy”, Bioethics 24, n.o 7 (4 de agosto de 2010): 333-40, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8519.2010.01831.x. Consultado el 19/03/2023.
REYES MOREL, Agustín. “Comunidades de significación como capacidades colectivas. Una revisión comunitarista de la teoría de Amartya Sen”, en: Areté. Revista de Filosofía, XX(1), 2008, p. 137-163.
SANDEL, Michael. El liberalismo y los límites de la justicia, Barcelona: Gedisa, 2009.
SAVULESCU, Julian. “New breeds of humans: The moral obligation to enhance”. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 10, 2005, p. 36-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1472-6483(10)62202-X Consultado el 17/04/2023.
SINGER, Peter. (2009). Parental choice and human enhancement. En Human Enhancement (pp. 277-289). New York:Oxford University Press.
TOBOSO MARTÍN, Mario. “Capacitismo”, en: R. Lucas Platero, María Rosón y Esther Ortega (eds.). Barbarismos queer y otras esdrújulas. Barcelona: Bellaterra, 2017, pp. 73-81.
TRONTO, Joan. Moral Bounderies. A Political Argument for an Ethic of Care. London: Routledge, 1993.
TRONTO, Joan. Un monde vulnérable, pour une politique du care. Paris: La Découverte, 2009.
WALDRON, Jeremy. Dignity, Rank and Rights. Oxford:Oxford University Press, 2012.
WALZER, Michael. Las esferas de la justicia: una defensa al pluralismo y la igualdad, México: FCE, 2001.
WILMOT, Henry; DE GRAAF, Gert; VAN CASTEREN, Pieter. et al. “Down syndrome screening and diagnosis practices in Europe, United States, Australia, and New Zealand from 1990–2021”. Eur J Hum Genet 31, 2023, 497–503. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-023-01330-y Consultado el 14/03/23.
WOLBRING, Gregor; GUZMÁN, Francisco (2010). “Human Enhacement through the Ableism Lens”, en: Dilemata. Revista internacional de éticas aplicadas, 3, pp. 1-13.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Revista Estudos Feministas
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Revista Estudos Feministas is under the Creative Commons International 4.0 Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), that allows sharing the work with recognition of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
The license allows:
Sharing (copying and redistributing the material in any support or format) and/or adapting (remixing, transforming, and creating from the material) for any purpose, even if commercial.
The licensor cannot revoke these rights provided the terms of the license are respected. The terms are the following:
Attribution – you should give the appropriate credit, provide a link to the license and indicate if changes were made. This can be done in several ways without suggesting that the licensor has approved of the use.
Without additional restrictions – You cannot apply legal terms or technological measures that prevent others from doing something allowed by the license.
