The Citizen in Question

Lanoix, Monique

doi:10.1111/j.1527-2001.2007.tb01323.x

Cited by 23 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In cases of cognitive disabilities, familial advocates (Weinberg, 2007) or more cognitively able citizens (Lanoix, 2007) represent the needs of those absent. But while reliance on experts or familial advocates may in part be motivated by the desire to protect the vulnerable, their exclusion is also a means to protect decision making.…”

Section: Communicative Participation As Speechmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making disability public in deliberative democracy

Clifford

2011

Contemp Polit Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deliberative democracy harbors a recurrent tension between full inclusion and intelligible speech. People with profound cognitive disabilities often signify this tension. While liberal deliberative theorists sacrifice inclusion for intelligibility, this exclusion is unnecessary. Instead, by analyzing deliberative locations that already include people with disabilities, I offer two ways to revise deliberative norms. First, the physical presence of disabled bodies expands the value of publicity in deliberative democracy, demonstrating that the publicity of bodies provokes new conversations similar to rational speech acts. Second, the inclusion of people with profound disabilities necessitates a form of collaborative speech in which individuals make claims collaboratively. Habermas offers an ideal site to pursue this analysis because he recognizes the theoretical tension between inclusion and intelligibility and because his personal testimony reveals important insight into the lived experience of disability. Contemporary Political Theory (2012) 11, 211-228. doi:10.1057/cpt.2011.11; published online 26 July 2011Keywords: deliberative democracy; Habermas; reciprocity; disability; dependency The disability rights motto of 'nothing about us without us' (Charlton, 1998) speaks both to the long history of exclusion of people with disabilities and to deliberative democratic theorists' commitment to inclusion. Deliberative democratic theorists and disability rights activists see inclusion as a linchpin of legitimacy and as a method to transform participants' beliefs. Aggregate models of democracy, in contrast, fail to capture the political participation of people with profound emotional and cognitive disabilities who are either disenfranchised by law or prohibited from voting due to the severity of impairment itself (Appelbaum, 2000). Deliberative theorists' promise of inclusion, however, is threatened by their conception of participation as reasonable speech acts. By neglecting alternative modes of non-verbal and embodied communication, deliberative theorists disable the speech of multiple populations.Disabled speech affects persons who are refused the opportunity to speak because their mode of communication defies reasonable and coherent r

show abstract

Section: Communicative Participation As Speechmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making disability public in deliberative democracy

Clifford

2011

Contemp Polit Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, this excludes and marginalises all groups of people who are unable to meet this ideal, including young people (Hart 2009), and some people with disabilities. Instead, Lanoix (2007) suggests that citizenship is based on the condition of being human and relational to others.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Citizenship and people living with dementia: A case for the ethics of care

Brannelly

2016

Dementia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ethics of care is an emerging field of interest in many disciplines, including care for people with dementia. The ethics of care as proposed by Joan Tronto is a political argument for care together with a set of principles, the integrity of care, to guide and critique practice. This two-pronged approach enables on one hand, a political, complex and situated examination of inequality, and on the other hand the integrity of care provides a set of principles to guide inclusive citizenship practices. This approach has the significant advantage of recognition of the fight that people with dementia face to achieve rights and citizenship as an issue of social justice. In this paper, three challenges to citizenship are discussed in relation to people with dementia using an ethics of care lens: (a) citizenship as a relationship between the individual and the state; (b) citizenship as a practice and (c) citizenship as identity and belonging. I propose that citizenship can be achieved by promoting inclusion in defining and creating policy, research and practice.

show abstract

“…Statusforståelsen knyttes til individets rettigheter som borger, og praksis-og rolleforståelsen relateres til borgernes plikter og funksjoner, muligheter og bidrag i felleskapssamfunnet (ibid.). Aktivt medborgerskap i en rettighets-og pliktdiskurs innebaerer at personer gis mulighet og forventes å gripe muligheten til å utøve både rettigheter og plikter i samfunnslivet uavhengig av forutsetninger, og medborgerskap oppfattes slik sett som et universelt fenomen (Caldwell, Harris og Renko 2012;Lanoix 2007).…”

Section: Kritikk Av Medborgerskapsdiskurserunclassified

“…I møte med tradisjonelle, universelle forståelser av medborgerskap, ekskluderes og diskrimineres flere grupper fra medborgerrollen, f. eks. borgere utenfor arbeidslivet, små barn, personer med funksjonsnedsettelse, demens, samt personer som har stor del av livet sitt som deltaker i hverdags-og omsorgspraksiser, ubetalt arbeid og frivillighet (Baldwin og Greason 2016;Lanoix 2007;Lister 1997;Young 1997). Personer med utviklingshemming av alvorlig grad, utfordrer i saerlig grad tradisjonelle, universelle forestillinger om idealborgeren som den autonome, verbale, politisk aktive borger med rasjonell og kognitiv kapasitet (Lanoix 2007;Kittay og Carlson (red.)…”

Section: Kritikk Av Medborgerskapsdiskurserunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

Medborgerskap og alvorlig utviklingshemming

Fjetland

Gjermestad

2018

TFV

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SAMMENDRAGArtikkelen tar utgangspunkt i den manglende teoretiseringen av forholdet mellom medborgerskap og alvorlig utviklingshemming, og diskuterer ekskluderende diskurser i klassisk medborgerskapstenkning. Forfatterne diskuterer hvordan aktivt medborgerskap kan fortolkes på en måte som tydeliggjør status og rolle for personer med utviklingshemming av alvorlig grad. Metodisk tas det utgangspunkt i resultater fra ulike empiriske studier basert på feltarbeid, intervju og videoobservasjon fra hverdagsliv til personer med utviklingshemming. Medborgerskap utforskes og fortolkes som et språklig og narrativt fenomen knyttet til aktørskap i ytringene til alle borgere. Analyse og argumentasjon er inspirert av narrativ filosofi, samspillteori og kritiske perspektiv knyttet til medborgerskap og funksjonshemming. Analysen viser at aktivt medborgerskap kan synliggjøres som et dialogisk fortellersamarbeid basert på en anerkjennende fortolking av aktørskap i unike ytringsformer hos borgere i deres hverdagsliv. Aktivt medborgerskap fremmes gjennom fortellersamarbeid i betydningen dialogisk kompetanse, narrativt medforfatterskap og narrativ omsorg i relasjonen mellom deltakerne i dialogen. Artikkelen konkluderer med at et dialogisk og narThis article is downloaded from www.idunn.no.

show abstract

The Citizen in Question

Cited by 23 publications

References 18 publications

Making disability public in deliberative democracy

Making disability public in deliberative democracy

Citizenship and people living with dementia: A case for the ethics of care

Medborgerskap og alvorlig utviklingshemming

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About