The capability approach is about creating justice by enabling people to live a self-determined life. Is this theory suitable to enable people with disabilities to freely choose their housing options? This will be investigated in this paper.
It seemed important to clarify which theories of norm ethics the capability approach is based on and from which it distinguishes itself.
For the majority of the German population, self-determination has been taken for granted since childhood. This circumstance is probably due in particular to the stable democracy. Adults can decide relatively freely about work, leisure, living, partnership and finances. Of course, there are limits to each person's freedom of choice insofar as they come up against the limits of other people, or the financial or cognitive limits of their own person. In comparison, people with disabilities face more limits and external regulations. A large part of those affected cannot freely choose their workplace, but have to come to terms with what is offered.
Many do not have the possibility to decide freely where and with whom they want to live. They also have to experience that partnerships and sexuality are prevented. Free time, the day, meals are planned and "pocket money" is allocated. Then there are the personal cognitive, mental or physical impairments that have to be compensated. The housing wishes of people with disabilities can usually only be implemented to the extent that there are vacancies, for example, in the residential home and in the residential group, or the need for support is rather low, so that outpatient residential care comes into question, or the relatives have enough resources to maintain the care. Most living arrangements involve a relatively high degree of dependence on other people by those affected. But to be dependent is to be externally determined. Innovative model projects for self-determined living are increasingly presented in professional journals. Can people with disabilities live self-determined lives?
Table of Contents
Introduction
I.Basics of Aristotelian theory in relation to the Capability Approach
II.Three Dimensions of Meaning of Justice
III.Ethics of standards
a.Utilitarianism
b.Contract theories
c.Theories of justice
d.John Rawls Theory of Justice
IV.The Capability Approach
a.Capability Approach according to Amartya Sen
b.Capabilities Approach according to Martha Nussbaum
V.Criticism of the Capability Approach
VI.Social work and empowerment justice
VII.Digression: Self-determined living of people with disabilities in the context of capabilities
a.Disability/ Impairment
b.Self-determination in case of impairment
c.Living with disabilities
VIII.Conclusion
IX.Bibliography
Objectives and Topics
This paper investigates the suitability of the Capability Approach as a theoretical framework to empower people with disabilities to achieve self-determined living, particularly regarding housing choices. It critically examines the ethical foundations of the approach and contrasts them with other normative theories.
- The theoretical foundations of the Capability Approach in relation to Aristotelian ethics and justice theories.
- A critical discourse on utilitarianism, contract theories, and John Rawls' theory of justice.
- The specific application of the Capability Approach by Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum.
- Challenges of self-determination for people with disabilities within current social and housing structures.
- The role of social work in fostering empowerment and overcoming systemic barriers.
Excerpt from the Book
VII. Digression: Self-determined living of people with disabilities in the context of capabilities
In 1980, the World Health Organization (WHO) published its first official definition of disability, the ICIDH (International classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps). In this definition, disability is seen in three dimensions. These are the physical damage, the resulting functional impairment or reduction in performance and the disadvantage of the person resulting from damage and impairment. The ICIDH distinguished disability from illness and supplemented the physical dimension of disability with a psychological-subjective and a social dimension. The disabled person becomes a person with a disability (cf. Jantzen 1987, p. 16).
Even in the 80s, however, disability was mainly understood as an individual problem. People with disabilities were mainly regarded as dependent and in need of help. They received welfare assistance from the state (cf. Participation Report of the Federal Government 2013, p. 31).
In 2001, the WHO published a new classification of disability in the ICF (International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health). A bio-psycho-social model is used. Impairments and resources of a person are assessed in the context of bodily functions, activities, environmental factors and personal factors (cf. www.dimdi.de). In the ICF, the consequences are decisive and not the fact of a malfunction or injury. Disability arises from negative interaction between person and context (cf. Participation Report of the Federal Government 2013, 30). The person with a disability becomes a person who is disabled (cf. ibid., p. 7).
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: Outlines the freedom of self-determination for most people in Germany compared to the systemic limitations faced by people with disabilities, introducing the Capability Approach as a possible solution.
I.Basics of Aristotelian theory in relation to the Capability Approach: Explores the roots of the approach in Aristotelian practical philosophy, focusing on the pursuit of happiness and the role of reason.
II.Three Dimensions of Meaning of Justice: Discusses the Aristotelian distinction between distributive and barter justice and its relevance for a modern understanding of fairness.
III.Ethics of standards: Provides an overview of normative ethics, covering Utilitarianism, Contract theories, and Theories of justice as the baseline for evaluating human action.
IV.The Capability Approach: Examines the development of the theory through the economic perspective of Amartya Sen and the philosophical perspective of Martha Nussbaum.
V.Criticism of the Capability Approach: Analyzes common critiques, including the problem of paternalism and the static view of capabilities.
VI.Social work and empowerment justice: Connects the Capability Approach to social work, emphasizing empowerment as a tool for creating socially just life chances.
VII.Digression: Self-determined living of people with disabilities in the context of capabilities: Applies the theory to disability policy, housing, and the right to self-determination.
VIII.Conclusion: Summarizes the findings and highlights the necessity of shifting political and social action toward polyphonic discourses on disability.
Keywords
Capability Approach, Self-determination, Social Justice, Empowerment, Disability, Impairment, Ethics, Human Rights, Social Work, Housing, Participation, Inklusion, Normative Ethics, Well-being, Freedom of Choice.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this paper?
The paper focuses on analyzing the Capability Approach as a framework for promoting self-determined living for people with disabilities, particularly within the context of social services and housing.
What are the primary thematic areas?
The main themes include normative ethics, justice theory, the historical evolution of disability definitions, and the practical application of empowerment strategies in social work.
What is the central research question?
The research investigates whether the Capability Approach is a suitable theoretical framework to enable people with disabilities to freely choose their own housing and life options.
Which scientific methods are employed?
The paper uses a literature-based theoretical analysis, contrasting various philosophical and ethical theories and applying them to contemporary empirical reports on disability and social participation.
What does the main body of the work cover?
It covers the foundational theories of justice (utilitarianism, contract theory), the specific concepts of the Capability Approach, criticisms of these theories, and the practical implementation of empowerment in disability-related social work.
Which keywords characterize this work?
Key terms include Capability Approach, empowerment, social justice, self-determination, disability, and inclusive social work.
How does the paper view the role of public institutions?
It argues that public institutions have the duty to create the structural conditions that enable individuals to freely make choices, rather than simply enforcing outcomes.
What does the author conclude about the "binary" view of disability?
The author suggests that empowerment alone is insufficient and calls for a discursive shift that challenges the binary construction of "disabled" versus "non-disabled" identities.
- Quote paper
- Anonym (Author), 2015, The Capability Approach – An application to the topic of "Self-determined living of people with disabilities", Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/1190318
