Because the permissibility or obligation is situationally dependent, this view is consistent with Barnes’s overall argument for the mere-difference view of disability. The Minority Body: A Theory of Disability by Elizabeth Barnes eBook 19.49 25. When we use an interest-protection framework instead, it becomes at least permissible for parents, and in some situations obligatory, to choose to remove their child’s disability. Barnes’s assumption relies on a non-interference framework, which is inappropriate when applied to children. The consequence of this theory is that it is impermissible for parents to choose to remove their child’s disability. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2019. To do this, I first explain her argument as it applies towards children: in order to have a genuine “mere-difference” view of disability, one may not cause nor remove disability. The Minority Body: A Theory of Disability (Studies in Feminist Philosophy). In this paper, I respond to one aspect of Elizabeth Barnes’s argument in The Minority Body: a Theory of Disability. Removing Disability in Children: An Essay on Barnes’s The Minority Body
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |