Self-regulated dependency: Ethical reflections on interdependence and help in adapted physical activity
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 2 (2):172 – 184 (2008)
This article explores the ethical implications of the goal of functional independence for persons with disabilities. Central to independence is protection against the fear and uncertainty of future dependency and assurance of a level of social status. Moreover, independence reflects individualism, autonomy and control of decisions about one's life. Dependency, in contrast, implies the inability to do things for oneself and reliance on others to assist with tasks of everyday life. The ethics of independence are explored within the context of the medical and social constructionist models of disability and contrasted against the ethics of support that underscores self-regulated dependency. Self-regulated dependency gives emphasis to the need for support created through relationships, choices and the management of resources. Finally, the article concludes with a challenge to meaningfully translate the principles of ethics to the multiplicity of adapted physical activity contexts
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Adrienne Asch (1998). Distracted by Disability. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 7 (01):77-87.
Tom L. Beauchamp (2009). Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Oxford University Press.
T. Koch (2001). Disability and Difference: Balancing Social and Physical Constructions. Journal of Medical Ethics 27 (6):370-376.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Øyvind F. Standal (2008). Celebrating the Insecure Practitioner. A Critique of Evidence-Based Practice in Adapted Physical Activity. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 2 (2):200-215.
Raymond M. Herbenick (1989). Natural Fetal Dependency States and Fetal Dependency Principles. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 63:173-181.
Asha Bhandary (2010). Dependency in Justice: Can Rawlsian Liberalism Accommodate Kittay's Dependency Critique? Hypatia 25 (1):140-156.
Robert Schroer (2010). How Far Can the Physical Sciences Reach? American Philosophical Quarterlly 47 (3):253-266.
Anne-Mette Bredahl (2008). Ethical Aspects in Research in Adapted Physical Activity. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 2 (2):257 – 270.
Shiloh Y. Whitney (2011). Dependency Relations: Corporeal Vulnerability and Norms of Personhood in Hobbes and Kittay. Hypatia 26 (3):554-574.
Jeffrey S. Pauline, Gina A. Pauline, Scott R. Johnson & Kelly M. Gamble (2006). Ethical Issues in Exercise Psychology. Ethics and Behavior 16 (1):61 – 76.
Eva Kittay (2002). Love's Labor Revisited. Hypatia 17 (3):237 - 250.
Eva Feder Kittay (2011). The Ethics of Care, Dependence, and Disability. Ratio Juris 24 (1):49-58.
Yeshayahu Hutzler (2008). Ethical Considerations in Adapted Physical Activity Practices. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 2 (2):158 – 171.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads17 ( #101,772 of 1,099,914 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #304,017 of 1,099,914 )
How can I increase my downloads?