scholarly journals Tracing an Ethic of Care in the Policy and Practice of the Troubled Families Programme

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 131-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sue Bond-Taylor

Drawing upon the Trace method developed by Selma Sevenhuijsen (2004), this paper has traced the discourse constructed in two key Troubled Families Programme (TFP) policy documents through the lens of care ethics, highlighting tensions between ‘care’ and ‘justice’ orientations in the neoliberal family intervention model. It is argued that whilst the family intervention model advocated has the potential to provide families with support underpinned by an ethic of care, the TFP's managerialist tendencies also create challenges to the integration of care ethics within such services. Given that the programme's financial framework generates considerable opportunity for local variation in policy implementation, the ethics of care offer a valuable moral framework by which to evaluate local practice. Moreover, engaging with a distinctly feminist ethic of care renders visible to family support services the inequalities produced through the gendered distribution of ‘caring’ responsibilities, and highlights the need for interventions to address rather than reinforce these inequalities.

Author(s):  
Fiona Robinson

This chapter builds a picture of a critical, feminist ethics of care as a feminist practical ethics for international relations. It focuses on care ethics as a moral framework for addressing the challenges of humanitarianism—in a manner that foregrounds human needs while not depoliticizing or taking for granted the category of “human.” A care ethics approach furthers the transformative aims of feminism, while refusing to cast “women-and-children” as vulnerable victims in need of protection. The ethics of care also offers a substantive focus for policy and practice around diverse and competing needs for care. Far from confining women to their roles as carers, this approach exposes patterns of gender inequality in care practices, while retaining a focus on the contribution of the voice and labour of care—in multiple and diverse forms—for all social groups and communities.


2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 413-420 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Jenkins

Robyn Jones is arguably the world’s leading researcher and scholar in the microsociology of sports coaching. Viewing coaching as a ‘complex socio-pedagogical process’ he has drawn especially from Erving Goffman’s work on stigma, interaction and impression management, in addition to educational perspectives such as Nel Noddings’ feminist ethic of care. This article and the accompanying commentaries from Robyn’s current and past doctoral students, as well as some colleagues from academia, is focused on the ontology, epistemology and methodology of research in sports coaching.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hillel Arnold

Social responsibility is not self-generating. Instead, it is learned through purposefully targeted listening, combined with an intent to both act in response to needs one has heard as well as to continually evaluate one’s actions. Feminist care ethics offers us a scaffolding within which we can learn how to sense social responsibility, act on that ethical knowledge, and then measure the results of our actions. Social responsibility as an ethic of care offers us a way to teach social responsibility to others in the profession and a way to advocate for the value of our labor to those outside of the profession.


Medical Law ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 1-35
Author(s):  
Emily Jackson

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter, which provides an introduction to bioethical reasoning, first explains the meaning of ‘medical ethics’ and the more recent term ‘bioethics’. It then considers how medical ethics has borrowed from different traditions in moral philosophy and varieties of ethical reasoning—from religious bioethics to a feminist ethic of care.


Hypatia ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 636-650 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irina Aristarkhova

In this paper, I critically develop the Jain concept of nonharm as a feminist philosophical concept that calls for a change in our relation to living beings, specifically to animals. I build on the work of Josephine Donovan, Carol J. Adams, Jacques Derrida, Kelly Oliver, and Lori Gruen to argue for a change from an ethic of care and dialogue to an ethic of carefulness and nonpossession. I expand these discussions by considering the Jain philosophy of nonharm (ahimsa) in relation to feminist and other theories that advocate noneating of animals, “humane killing,” and “less harm.” Finally, I propose that a feminist appropriation of the Jain concept of nonharm helps us develop a feminist ethic of nonharm to all living beings.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document