Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T21:32:32.220Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Civic Labour or Doulia? Care, Reciprocity and Welfare

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 October 2007

Alan Deacon
Alan Deacon*
Affiliation:
Professor of Social Policy, University of Leeds E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article discusses the grounds on which those who provide informal social care for dependent adults and children can be held to warrant public support, and what obligations they should accept in return. It outlines two interpretations of the rights and responsibilities of such care workers: Stuart White's notion of care as civic labour and Eva Feder Kittay's principle of doulia. It shows that these interpretations reflect different understandings of the self and of reciprocity. The conclusion is that Kittay's writings better reflect the relationality of care, but that it is still possible to justify some forms of welfare conditionality.

Type
Articles
Information
Social Policy and Society , Volume 6 , Issue 4 , October 2007 , pp. 481 - 490
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barclay, L. (2000), ‘Autonomy and the social self’, in Mackenzie, C. and Stoljar, N. (eds), Relational Autonomy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Blair, T. (1998), The Third Way: New Politics for the New Century, London: Fabian Society.Google Scholar
Bubeck, D. G. (2002), ‘Justice and the labor of care’, in Kittay, E.F. and Feder, E.K. (eds), The Subject of Care: Feminist Perspectives on Dependency, Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, pp. 160–185.Google Scholar
Clement, G. (1996), Care, Autonomy and Justice: Feminism and the Ethic of Care, Colorado: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Daly, M. and Lewis, J. (2000), ‘The concept of social care and the analysis of contemporary welfare states’, British Journal of Sociology, 51, 2, 281–298.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Daniels, N. (2002), ‘Need we abandon social contract theory?’, Ethical Choices in Long-Term Care: What Does Justice Require? Geneva: World Health Organisation, pp. 67–76.Google Scholar
Deacon, A. (2004), ‘Justifying conditionality: the case of anti-social tenants’, Housing Studies, 19, 6, 911–926.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deacon, A. (2005), ‘An ethic of mutual responsibility? Towards a fuller justification for conditionality in welfare’, in Mead, L. and Beem, C. (eds), Welfare Reform and Political Theory, New York: Russell Sage Foundation, pp. 127–150.Google Scholar
Department of Work and Pensions (2006a), A New Deal for Welfare: Empowering People to Work, Cm 6730, London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Department of Work and Pensions (2006b), Delivering on Child Poverty: What Would It Take? Cm 6951, London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Dillane, J., Hill, M., Bannister, J. and Scott, S. (2001), Evaluation of the Dundee Families Project: Final Report, Glasgow: University of Glasgow.Google Scholar
Fine, M. D. (2007), A Caring Society? Care and the Dilemmas of Human Service in the 21st Century, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Fitzpatrick, T. (2005), ‘The fourth attempt to construct a politics of welfare obligations’, Policy and Politics, 33, 1, 15–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghate, D. and Hazel, N. (2002), Parenting in Poor Environments: Stress, Support and Coping, London: Jennifer Kingsley.Google Scholar
Ghate, D. and Ramella, M. (2002), Positive Parenting: The National Evaluation of the Youth Justice Board's Parenting Programme, London: Policy Research Bureau for the Youth Justice Board.Google Scholar
Halpern, D., Bates, C., Beales, G. and Heathfield, A. (2004), Personal Responsibility and Changing Behaviour: The State of Knowledge and its Implications for Public Policy, London: Prime Minister's Strategy Unit.Google Scholar
Harker, L. and Kendall, L. (2003), An Equal Start? Improving Support during Pregnancy and the First Twelve Months, London: Institute for Public Policy Research.Google Scholar
Henricson, C. (2003), Government and Parenting, York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.Google Scholar
Kittay, E. F. (1999), Love's Labor: Essays on Women, Equality and Dependency, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kittay, E. F. (2001), ‘A feminist public ethic of care meets the new communitarian family policy’, Ethics, 111 (April), 523–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kittay, E. F. (2002), ‘Can contractualism justify state-supported long-term care politics?’, Ethical Choices in Long-Term Care: What Does Justice Require? Geneva: World Health Organisation, pp. 77–83.Google Scholar
Lewis, J. (2006a), ‘Care and gender: have the arguments for recognising care work now been won?’, in Glendinning, C. and Kemp, P. (eds), Cash and Care: Policy Challenges in the Welfare State, Bristol: Policy Press, pp. 11–20.Google Scholar
Lewis, J. (2006b), ‘Carework: are care accounts the answer?’, in Paxton, W., White, S. and Maxwell, D. (eds), The Citizen's Stake: Exploring the Future of Universal Capital Grants, Bristol: Policy Press, pp. 151–164.Google Scholar
Lewis, J. and Giullari, S. (2005), ‘The adult worker model family, gender and care: the search for new policy principles and the possibilities and problems of a capabilities approach’, Economy and Society, 34, 1, 76–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, J. (1996), ‘Gender, care and sensibility in family and kin relationships’, in Holland, S. and Adkins, L. (eds), Sex, Sensibility and the Gendered Body, London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Mead, L. and Beem, C. (2005), ‘The deeper issues’, in Mead, L. and Beem, C. (eds), Welfare Reform and Political Theory, New York: Russell Sage Foundation, pp. 249–269.Google Scholar
Mink, G. (1998), Welfare's End, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Nixon, J., Hunter, C. and Parr, S. (2006), Interim Evaluation of Rehabilitation Projects for Families at Risk of Losing Their Homes as a Result of Anti-Social Behaviour, London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, M. (2006), Frontiers of Justice, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Piachaud, D. (2001), ‘Child poverty, opportunities and quality of life’, Political Quarterly, 72, 4, 446–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piachaud, D. (2005), ‘Social policy and politics’, Political Quarterly, 76, 3, 350–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Respect Task Force (2006), Respect Action Plan, London: Home Office, www.respect.gov.ukGoogle Scholar
Seaman, P., Turner, K., Hill, M., Stafford, A. and Walker, M. (2006), Parenting and Children's Resilience in Disadvantaged Communities, London: National Children's Bureau for the Joseph Rowntree Foundation.Google Scholar
Sevenhuijsen, S. (2002), ‘A third way? Moralities, ethics and families: an approach through the ethic of care’, in Carling, A., Duncan, S. and Edwards, R. (eds), Analysing Families: Morality and Rationality in Policy and Practice, London: Routledge, pp. 129–144.Google Scholar
Smith, S. R. (2002), ‘Fraternal learning and interdependency: celebrating differences within reciprocal commitments’, Policy and Politics, 30, 1, 47–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tronto, J. (1993), Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for an Ethic of Care, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Tronto, J. (2001), ‘Who cares? Public and private caring and the re-thinking of citizenship’, in Hirschmann, N. and Leibert, U. (eds), Women and Welfare: Theory and Practice in the US and Europe, Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
West, R. (2002), ‘The right to care’, Kittay, E.F. and Feder, E.K. (eds), The Subject of Care: Feminist Perspectives on Dependency, Lanham, MD. Rowman & Littlefield, pp. 88–114.Google Scholar
White, S. (2003), The Civic Minimum: On the Rights and Obligations of Economic Citizenship, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, S. (2004), ‘Reciprocity, care work and citizenship’, paper presented to symposium on Rethinking Care Relations: Family Lives and Policies, University of Leeds, 3–4 December.Google Scholar
White, S. (2005), ‘Is conditionality illiberal?’, in Mead, L. and Beem, C. (eds), Welfare Reform and Political Theory, New York: Russell Sage Foundation, pp. 82–109.Google Scholar
Williams, F. (2003), ‘Rethinking care as social policy’, paper presented to Annual Conference of the Finnish Social Policy Association, University of Joensuu, Finland, 24 October.Google Scholar
Williams, F. (2004), Rethinking Families, London: Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation.Google Scholar
Young, I. M. (2002), ‘Autonomy, welfare reform and meaningful work’, Kittay, E.F. and Feder, E.K. (eds), The Subject of Care: Feminist Perspectives on Dependency, Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, pp. 40–59.Google Scholar