3 - Care and the non-human

Summary

The previous chapter focused on care among human beings. However, care ethics isn't limited to humans. Recall Tronto and Fisher's definition of care: “On the most general level, we suggest that caring be viewed as a species activity that includes everything that we do to maintain, continue, and repair our ‘world‘ so that we can live in it as well as possible”. The “world” they‘re referring to includes not just humans but other animals, the environment, social and political systems, precious objects, and so on. In this chapter, then, we‘ll turn our attention to some of the non-human inhabitants of our world in order to see what caring looks like in regard to them. Let's start with the inhabitants closest to us.

PETS

In our old house we sort of lived with a cat. The cat's name was Sammy, or Rufus, depending on which of our offspring you asked. I say “sort of ” because while the cat lived outside on a backyard lawn with a treehouse, we had decided to live inside prior to getting the cat. The reason Sammy/Rufus lived outside was that I was allergic to cats and my family wanted me to keep from having itchy skin and a runny nose all the time. They also respected the fact that I don't like pets. Because they cared.

I also say “lived with” instead of “owned”. Legally, of course, we owned Sammy/Rufus. If he had attacked a neighbour or a neighbour's pet, we would have been responsible for the damages. (He was actually pretty chill, so that wasn‘t a problem. Like other cats, he did go on the occasional walkabout, but that's pretty much it.) If we had mistreated him, we would have been liable under anti-cruelty laws. In short, we were responsible for him and his behaviour. In that sense, he was like our offspring back when they could properly be referred to as kids.

But notice here that responsibility doesn't require ownership. The fact that I‘m legally responsible for the behaviour of some creature does not necessarily mean that I own it.