Hypatia 32 (4):801-816 (2017)

Kari Greenswag
University of Sydney
Although Daniel Engster's “caring” human rights are, on the surface, a compelling way to bring the concept of care into the international political realm, I argue they actually serve to perpetuate some of the same problems of mainstream human-rights discourses. The problem is twofold. First, Engster's particular care theory relies on an uncritical acceptance of our dependence relations. It can, therefore, not only overlook how local and global institutions, norms, and the marketplace shape our relations of dependence, but also serve to further naturalize our current dependence relations. Second, Engster's caring human rights are only minimally feminist, which means that they do not pay attention to the way in which women's full and equal political participation is a necessary component to challenging and overcoming the oppression, marginalization, and exploitation of women and their caring labor worldwide. Although I am sympathetic to Engster's goals and some of his proposed policy solutions, I argue that we should not abandon the critical, feminist lens of care ethics in favor of “caring” human rights that cannot overcome the care critique of mainstream human-rights discourses.
Keywords Ethics of Care  International Ethics  Human Rights
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/hypa.12357
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 65,587
External links

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

The Sexual Contract.Carole Pateman - 1990 - Ethics 100 (3):658-669.
The Ethics of Care: Personal, Political, and Global.Mary Mahowald - 2009 - International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 2 (1):177-181.
Feminist Transformations of Moral Theory.Virginia Held - 1990 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 50:321-344.
Care Ethics and Animal Welfare.Daniel Engster - 2006 - Journal of Social Philosophy 37 (4):521–536.

View all 12 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

A Care Ethical Justification for an Interest Theory of Human Rights.Thomas E. Randall - 2020 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy:1-25.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Importance of Care in the Theory and Practice of Human Security.Fiona Robinson - 2008 - Journal of International Political Theory 4 (2):167-188.
New Directions in Theorizing Human Rights.Eileen Hunt Botting - 2016 - Journal of International Political Theory 12 (1):3-9.
The Philosophical Foundations of Human Rights: An Overview.Rowan Cruft, S. Matthew Liao & Massimo Renzo - 2015 - In Rowan Cruft, S. Matthew Liao & Massimo Renzo (eds.), Philosophical Foundations of Human Rights. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. pp. 1-44.
Obligations to Animals Are Based on Rights.Tom Regan - 1995 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 8 (2):171-180.
Human Rights and the Leap of Love.Alexandre Lefebvre - 2016 - Journal of French and Francophone Philosophy 24 (2):21-40.
The Sovereignty of Human Rights.Patrick Macklem - 2015 - Oxford University Press USA.
History, Human Rights, and Globalization.Sumner B. Twiss - 2004 - Journal of Religious Ethics 32 (1):39-70.


Added to PP index

Total views
28 ( #396,455 of 2,461,940 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #298,784 of 2,461,940 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes