Abstract
The notion of vulnerable groups has gained relevance in international legal instruments while being criticised in philosophical literature for its disabling potential and disempowering consequences. The article argues that the category of group vulnerability should not be abandoned, being an opportunity for resistance, visibility, and a place for dissent: vulnerable groups can both function as a sounding board for claims and make demands for recognition, resetting the political agenda and the topics of public debate, and allow the level of collective needs to emerge from the level of individual interests, thereby guaranteeing a fairer distribution of resources. For this purpose, the article provides two definitions of group vulnerability that avoid both the risks of essentialism and of labelling outcomes. The article also analyses the political value of vulnerable groups, highlighting that it is conceivable as an enabling condition, a source of political agency and mobilisation.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ayalon, L. and Tesch-Römer, C. (eds.) (2018) Contemporary Perspectives on Ageism. Cham: Springer.
Arruzza, C., Bhattacharya, T. and Fraser, N. (2019) Feminism for the 99%. London: Verso.
Asch, S.M., Kerr, E.A., Keesey, J., Adams, J.L., Setodji, C.M., Malik, S. and McGlynn, E.A. (2006) Who is at greatest risk of receiving poor-quality health care? New England Journal of Medicine 354: 1147–1156.
Baer, S. (2013) Privatizing religion. Legal groupism, no-go-areas, and the public-private-ideology in human rights politics. Constellations 20(1): 68–84.
Bartky, S.L. (2015) Femininity and Domination: Studies in the Phenomenology of Oppression. London: Routledge.
Bozzaro, C., Boldt, J. and Shweda, M. (2018) Are older people a vulnerable group? Philosophical and bioethical perspectives on ageing and vulnerability. Bioethics 32: 233–239.
Brown, K., Ecclestone, K. and Emmel, N. (2017) The many faces of vulnerability. Social Policy and Society 16(3): 497–510.
Brubaker, R. (2006) Ethnicity Without Groups. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Butler, J. (2016a) Frames of War: When is Life Grievable?. New York: Verso Books.
Butler, J. (2006) Precarious Life: The Powers of Mourning and Violence. New York: Verso Books.
Butler, J. (2016b) Rethinking vulnerability and resistance. In J. Butler, Z. Gambetti and L. Sabsay (eds.) vulnerability and Resistance. Durham: Duke University Press.
Castells, M. (1997) The Power of Identity. Oxford: Blackwell.
Cixous, H. (1975) La jeune née. Paris: Union Générale d’éditions.
Cole, A. (2016) All of us are vulnerable, but some are more vulnerable than others: The political ambiguity of vulnerability studies, an ambivalent critique. Critical Horizons 17(2): 260–277.
Crenshaw, K. (1989) Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. In: University of Chicago Legal Forum, pp. 139–167.
Crenshaw, K. (1991) Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of colour. Stanford Law Review 43: 1241–1301.
Daly, J.M., Merchant, Mary L. and Jogerst, G.J. (2011) Elder abuse research: A systematic review. Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect 23(4): 348–365.
Dresser, R. and Frader, J. (2009) Off-label prescribing: A call for heightened professional and government oversight. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 37(3): 476–486.
Ebrahim, S. (2000) Do not resuscitate decisions: flogging dead horses or a dignified death? Resuscitation should not be withheld from elderly people without discussion. British Medical Journal 320: 1155–1156.
Eisenberg, A. and Spinner-Halev, J. (2005) Introduction. In A. Eisenberg and J. Spinner-Halev (eds.) Minorities within Minorities: Equality, Rights and Diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Eisenberg, A. (2009) Reasons of Identity: A Normative Guide to the Political and Legal Assessment of Identity Claims. New York: Oxford University Press.
Engster, D. (2019) Care ethics, dependency, and vulnerability. Ethics and Social Welfare 13(2): 100–114.
Ferrarese, E. (2016) Vulnerability: A concept with which to undo the world as it is? Critical Horizons 17(2): 149–159.
Fineman, M.A. (2004) The Autonomy Myth. A Theory of Dependency. New York: The New Press.
Fineman, M.A. (2010) The vulnerable subject and the responsive state. Emory Law Journal 60: 251–276.
Fineman, M.A. (2008) The vulnerable subject: Anchoring equality in the human condition. Yale Journal of Law & Feminism 20: 1–24.
Fineman, M.A. (2012) Beyond identities: The limits of an antidiscrimination approach to equality. Boston University Law Review 92: 1713–1770.
Fineman, M. (2013) Equality, autonomy, and the vulnerable subject in law and politics. In M.A. Fineman and A. Grear (eds.) Vulnerability: Reflections on a New Ethical Foundation for Law and Politics. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing.
Fraser, N. (1990) Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. Social Text 25(26): 56–80.
Fraser, N. (2013) Fortunes of Feminism: From State-Managed Capitalism to Neoliberal Crisis. New York: Verso Books.
Goodin, R. (1986) Protecting the Vulnerable: A Re-analysis of Our Social Responsibilities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Goodley, D. (2014) Dis/ability Studies: Theorising Disableism and Ableism. London: Routledge.
Green, L. (1994) Internal minorities and their rights. In J. Baker (ed.) Group Rights. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Hurst, S.A. (2008) Vulnerability in research and health care; describing the elephant in the room? Bioethics 22(4): 191–202.
Ippolito, F. and Iglesias Sanchez, S. (eds.) (2015) Protecting Vulnerable Groups: The European Human Rights Framework. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
Kapp, M.B. (2002) Health care rationing affecting older persons: Rejected in principle but implemented in fact. Journal of Aging & Social Policy 14(2): 27–42.
Khan, S.U., Khan, M.Z., Raghu Subramanian, C., et al.. (2020) Participation of women and older participants in randomized clinical trials of lipid-lowering therapies: A systematic review. JAMA Network Open. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.5202.
Kipnis, K. (2001) Vulnerability in Research Subjects: A Bioethical Taxonomy (Research Involving Human Participants V2), Ethical and Policy Issues in Research Involving Human Participants, Vol. 2. Bethesda: Commissioned Papers and Staff Analysis, National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC).
Kittay, E.F. (1995) Taking dependency seriously: The Family and Medical Leave Act considered in light of the social organization of dependency work and gender equality. Hypatia 10(1): 8–29.
Kittay, E.F. (1999) Love’s Labor: Essays on Women, Equality and Dependency. London: Routledge.
Levine, C., Faden, R., Grady, C., Hammerschmidt, D., Eckenwiler, L. and Sugarman, J. (2004) The limitations of “vulnerability” as a protection for human research participants. American Journal of Bioethics 4(3): 44–49.
Liu, K.A. and Di Pietro Mager, N.A. (2016) Women’s involvement in clinical trials: Historical perspective and future implications. Pharmacy Practice 14(1): 1–9.
Luna, F. (2009) Elucidating the concept of vulnerability: Layers not labels. IJFAB: International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 2(1): 121–139.
MacIntyre, A.C. (1999) Dependent Rational Animals: Why Human Beings Need the Virtues. Vol. 20. Chicago: Open Court Publishing.
Macioce, F. (2019) Informed consent procedures between autonomy and trust. Biolaw Journal 1: 23–35.
MacKenzie, C., Rogers, W. and Dodds, S. (eds.) (2014) Vulnerability, New Essays in Ethics and Feminist Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nussbaum, M.C. (2001) The Fragility of Goodness. Luck and Ethics in Greek Tragedy and Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Okin, S.M. (1999) Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women?. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Peroni, L. and Timmer, A. (2013) Vulnerable groups: The promise of an emerging concept in European Human Rights Convention law. International Journal of Constitutional Law 11(4): 1056–1085.
Quadagno, J. (2004) Why the United States has no national health insurance: Stakeholder mobilization against the welfare state, 1945–1996. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 45: 25–44.
Quadagno, J. (2010) Institutions, interest groups, and ideology: An agenda for the sociology of health care reform. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 51(2): 125–136.
Rancière, J. (2006) The ethical turn of aesthetics and politics. Critical Horizons 7(1): 1–20.
Rogers, W., Mackenzie, C. and Dodds, S. (2012) Why bioethics needs a concept of vulnerability. IJFAB: International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 5(2): 11–38.
Rogers, W. (2014) Vulnerability and bioethics. In C. MacKenzie, W. Rogers and S. Dodds (eds.) Vulnerability, New Essays in Ethics and Feminist Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sartre, J.P. (2004) Critique of Dialectical Reason. Trans. A. Sheridan-Smith. London: Verso.
Shachar, A. (2001) Multicultural Jurisdictions: Cultural Differences and Women’s Rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Spelman, E. (1988) Inessential Woman: Problems of Exclusion in Feminist Thought. Boston: Beacon Press.
Tronto, J. (1993) Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for an Ethic of Care. New York: Routledge.
Tronto, J. (2013) Caring Democracy: Markets, Equality, and Justice. New York: New York University Press.
Turner, B.S. (2006) Vulnerability and Human Rights. University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
Wallerstein, I. (2004) World-Systems Analysis: An Introduction. Durham: Duke University Press.
Witt, C. (1995) Anti-essentialism in feminist theory. Philosophical Topics 23(2): 321–344.
Wolbring, G. (2008) The politics of ableism. Development 51(2): 252–258.
Woodly, D. (2015) Seeing collectivity: Structural relation through the lens of Youngian seriality. Contemporary Political Theory 14(3): 213–233.
Young, I.M. (1990) Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Young, I.M. (1994) Gender as seriality: Thinking about women as a social collective. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 19(3): 713–738.
Young, I.M. (2000) Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Zucker, I. and Prendergast, B.J. (2020) Sex differences in pharmacokinetics predict adverse drug reactions in women. Biology of Sex Differences 11: 1–14.
Acknowledgements
I wish to thank, for their valuable comments and guidance, the two anonymous reviewers, and especially Andrew Schaap for the accuracy and insightfulness of his comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Macioce, F. The enabling value of group vulnerability. Contemp Polit Theory 22, 209–229 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41296-022-00568-3
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41296-022-00568-3