Relational approaches to personal autonomy

Lee, J. Y.

doi:10.1111/phc3.12916

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 121 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The core notion in autonomy is that the autonomous individual can make free choices and act on them. Autonomy seems to be the key conflict among the participants in my PAR research (Dworkin, 1998in Lee, 2023. They find themselves constantly battling with this moral conflict in interaction with their parents and with other members of society.…”

Section: Autonomymentioning

confidence: 99%

Teaching Moral Values Through Real-life Dilemmas

Balakrishnan

2023

ijess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study is to contribute to contemporary debates about alternative ways of teaching Moral Education (ME) in Malaysia by including the voice of students. ME in the Malaysian setting is both complex and compulsory. The research is founded on a modified version of Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), extended to suit the multicultural, multi-ethnic Malaysian setting, and here called the Zone of Collaborative Development (ZCD). This study uses qualitative research methodology consisting of a modified framework of participatory action research (PAR) as the methodological framework. Data was gathered for textual analysis through a modified form of participant observation, focus group transcripts, interviews, and student journals. Findings show that students were concerned about moral issues and values not covered in the current ME curriculum. The moral dilemmas that they identified were relational and context dependent. Multiple factors contributed to the problems they described.

show abstract

Section: Autonomymentioning

confidence: 99%

Teaching Moral Values Through Real-life Dilemmas

Balakrishnan

2023

ijess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this article, I argue that legal obligations towards future generations are grounded in the relational character of human rights (Section 3), which is acknowledged by many scholars and can be explained from different conceptual angles, such as (egalitarian) liberal accounts (e.g., John Rawls), or by drawing on concepts of the relational self (e.g., Held, 2006;Herring, 2020;Nedelsky, 2011;Wallace, 2019), and/or relational autonomy (Lee, 2023). I do not refer to any such account but to the meta-theoretical relational account and model of fundamental rights that I developed (Behrendt, 2023b).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Facing the Future: Conceiving Legal Obligations Towards Future Generations

Behrendt

2024

PaG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conceiving legal obligations towards future generations is challenging—especially from a positivist stance and if obligations and claims are understood as being correlative in nature. Legal obligations towards future generations are often rejected from the outset if (and insofar as) there is no explicit acknowledgement or established doctrine. This neglects the power of sound legal interpretation. I argue that obligations towards future people and generations are grounded in the relational character of human rights and that their positivity is not a problem in a legal order containing norm texts that can reasonably be interpreted as acknowledging human rights; no additional enactment is necessary for these obligations to be part of the positive law. This claim is based on a (novel) concept of fundamental rights which is compatible with legal positivism.

show abstract

Digital Health Empowerment, Autonomy, and the Capability Approach: Reply to de Proost and Grey

Nickel,

Loosman,

Frank

et al. 2024

DISO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

De Proost & Grey criticize Nickel et al.’s article “Justice and empowerment through digital health: ethical challenges and opportunities,” arguing that it should have embraced relational autonomy and capability approaches. We distinguish two variants of this critique, one saying that a view of digital health empowerment should welcome these approaches, and one saying that a view of digital health empowerment should essentially be defined in terms of these approaches. We are somewhat open to the first variant: relational autonomy and the capability approach are promising ways of spelling out the ethical values behind digital health empowerment, even if they are not completely unproblematic and uncontroversial. However, there are reasons to reject the second variant. A view that leaves the exact normative commitments of digital health empowerment open is persuasive to a wider audience, and more amenable to different constructs of autonomy, capability, and empowerment across disciplines.

show abstract

Relational approaches to personal autonomy

Cited by 5 publications

References 121 publications

Teaching Moral Values Through Real-life Dilemmas

Teaching Moral Values Through Real-life Dilemmas

Facing the Future: Conceiving Legal Obligations Towards Future Generations

Digital Health Empowerment, Autonomy, and the Capability Approach: Reply to de Proost and Grey

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About