Philosophy and profound disability: learning from experience

Abstract

Reflection on profound and multiple learning difficulties and disabilities raises a series of questions in moral and political philosophy, a claim supported by philosophical argument but also given credence by human testimony, some examples of which are presented here. I introduce three young people with profound learning disabilities, before presenting testimony on their behalf, organised so as to coincide with a series of related philosophical questions about human dignity, respect, citizenship and dependency. I suggest that there are implications that apply to all people and not only to those with profound learning difficulties.

Self-Determination: What can we Learn from Persons with Profound Intellectual and Multiple Disabilities?

“…We suggest, in line with Vorhaus (2014), that the answers to such questions are not specific to people with PIMD. Insights from their lives can and should inform general understanding of self-determination in all human lives.…”

“…Amongst other effects, such asymmetry involves difference in relational power and allows, for example, professionals to extend or withhold support and thus influence potentials for self-determination. But despite this asymmetry, reciprocity still can exist in the relationship (Vorhaus 2014), through, for example, love or affection (Kittay 2020: 61). In that vein, Young (1997) has introduced the concept of asymmetrical reciprocity, which emphasises the recognition of differences between oneself and others and allows a person to approach another with wonder and openness, thereby making the other's contribution fully visible.…”

Voiceless subjects? Research ethics and persons with profound intellectual disabilities

“…However, in our view WHO'S definition captures only partially the complex nature of PIMD. We aim for a more nuanced approach with the help of various theoretical accounts such as the capabilities approach (Nussbaum, 2006;Vorhaus, 2014) and (critical) realism (Bhaskar & Danermark, 2006;Vehmas & Mäkelä, 2009) in order to cater for the individual and social aspects related to PIMD.…”

Narrowed Lives: Meaning, Moral Value, and Profound Intellectual Disability

“…However, there is body of work that recognises the social and cultural elements related to disablement but that does not necessarily identify with disability studies or any of its theoretical narratives as such (e.g. Bigby, Clement, Mansell, & Beadle-Brown, 2009;Goodwin, 2020;Granlund, Wilder, & Almqvist, 2013;McCormack, 2020;Nind, 2007;Pawlyn & Carnaby, 2009;Samuel, Nind, Volans, & Scriven, 2008: Simmons & Watson, 2014Talman, Wilder, Stier, & Gustafsson, 2019;Tilley, Ledger, & Haas, 2020;Vorhaus, 2013Vorhaus, , 2014. Alongside these kinds of contributions, our work can be seen to be in the same league as the work of Clement and Bigby (2013) on living arrangements, Goode's (1994) ethnographic research on children with congenital deaf-blindness and intellectual disability, Johnson and Walmsley's (2010) contribution on the meaning of a good life with reference to current policies and ideologies, and Vorhaus's (2016) empirically informed philosophical work on children with PIMD.…”