The Disabled People's Movement (DPM) and the Feminist Movement appeal to incompatible meanings of 'care'. For the DPM the word 'care' is to be resisted.The emotional connotations implicit in the concept and experience of care inhibit the emancipatory project for independence and self-determination. Feminist theorists value the concept of care, and the emotional aspect of 'caring about' in 'caring for'. Given that independence can be interpreted as an ideological distortion of 'malestream' public policy, feminists argue that it should be replaced by the concept of interdependence. Furthermore, feminists express concern that the DPM's pragmatic solution to the problem of 'care' is a form of discursive alignment with 'malestream' public policy that constitutes both disabled people and women as 'other' subjects of modern welfare state economies.Drawing on the work of Irigaray, we propose that a post-feminist analysis of the constitution of the parties in the caring dyad can help to make the case for a mutually beneficial ethics of care. We support the feminist voice in disability studies, particularly its call for an embodied, experiential, emotional and political view of the caring relationship. We articulate a post-structuralist feminist critique of waste and want as the discursive terrain upon which both disabled people and women are constituted as marginalized subjects in caring relationships. Irigaray's claim that women's immersion in the pleasure of 'the other' marginalizes her from her embodied experience, dims her sense of self, and locates her and her caring practices in a liminal, abject space on the margins of phallocentric culture, ground this analysis. We claim that disabled people are similarly disembodied, and constituted as waste, and that their passionate fight for dispassionate goals might be working against their demands for a dignified and inclusive existence. Finally, we make a plea to disability activists and feminists to make common cause in the struggle for an ethics of care that is founded upon embodied interdependence.

Fort McMurray Métis Elders and land users have observed a decrease in the population density of freshwater mussels (known locally as clams; Unionidae) in the lower Athabasca region (LAR) in recent decades. A community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach, braided with Indigenous Knowledge, is used as a guiding framework to facilitate partnerships and create safe, ethical spaces across diverse knowledge systems to address questions about freshwater mussel health in a locally relevant and culturally appropriate way. Opportunities for Elders and land users to travel along the Athabasca and Clearwater rivers in search of freshwater mussels allowed for the renewal of personal and cultural relationships to place that was braided with the study of parameters relevant to Western science. Our search revealed the presence of fat muckets (Lampsilis siliquoidea), with a limited number of giant floaters (Anodonta grandis), in our study area. However, delineating the types of species present is only the beginning of our work to understand freshwater mussel health in the LAR. We present a methodological discussion that demonstrates the importance of prioritizing Indigenous Knowledge to answer questions that may not have been considered within Western knowledge systems and shows how diverse ways of knowing can be braided to create new learnings together. “Learning together,” in practice, means recognizing that each person has knowledge and skills to contribute, which also involves shared decision making. We maintain that by “learning together,” complex problems can be understood in ways that are more meaningful and insightful than they would be if Indigenous communities, government scientists, or research consultants studied them alone.

In this article we examine the tensions between feminist and disability studies perspectives on care.We argue that an emancipatory model of care is one that must address these tensions. In developing this model we consider the notions of (inter)dependence and need across the lifecourse. Drawing on the work of Fraser (1989), we propose that the notion of ‘needscape’ can be used to construct a ‘discourse bridge’ that will mediate between the disability studies and feminist perspectives on care. Notions of care and caring have been subject to criticism by feminist and disability theorists.There is a presumption by some that care is an activity to which women are naturally suited and this forms a starting point for the claim associated with the feminist view that care is a source of women’s exploitation. For disability activists notions of care are dis-empowering.The person in receipt of care is often assumed to be passive and dependent. This is exemplified in the limited access of disabled people to choices over the nature and form of the social support that they may need.

No abstract

No abstract