, Volume 32, Issue 2, pp 153–160 | Cite as

Well-Being and the Capability of Health

  • Christopher A. RiddleEmail author


In this paper, I argue that health plays a special role in the promotion of well-being within the capabilities approach framework. I do this by first presenting a scenario involving two individuals, both of whom lack access to only one capability. The first cannot secure the capability of bodily health due to an unhealthy lifestyle, whilst the second lacks access to bodily integrity due to a life of celibacy. Second, I explore these scenarios by assessing the nature of disadvantage suffered in both instances. I suggest that corrosive disadvantage (or the type of disadvantage that adversely impacts one’s ability to secure other valuable things) is what leads us to conclude that health is of special moral importance in the promotion of justice and the endorsing of well-being.


Capabilities Health Well-being Disadvantage 


  1. Anderson E (1999) What is the point of equality? Ethics 109:287–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arneson R (2005) ‘Good enough’ is not good enough. In: Kauffman A (ed) Capabilities equality: basic issues and problems. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Daniels N (1985) Just health care. Cambridge University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Daniels N (1999) Justice and justification: reflective equilibrium in theory and practice. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Daniels N (2001) Justice, health, and health care. Am J Bioethics 1:2–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Daniels N (2008) Just health: meeting health needs fairly. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Nibert D et al (1989) Assaults against residents of a psychiatric institution: residents’ history of abuse. J Interpers Violence 4:342–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Nussbaum M (1990) Aristotelian social democracy. In: Douglas RB, Mara GM, Richardson H (eds) Liberalism and the good. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Nussbaum M (2000) Women and human development. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  10. Nussbaum M (2006) Frontiers of justice: disability, nationality and species membership. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  11. Nussbaum M (2011) Creating capabilities: the human development approach. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Preamble to the Constitution of the World Health Organization as adopted by the International Health Conference, New York, 19–22 June, 1946; signed on 22 July 1946 by the representatives of 61 States (official records of the World Health Organization, no. 2, p. 100) and entered into force on 7 April 1948Google Scholar
  13. Rawls J (1971) A theory of justice. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  14. Rawls J (1993) Political liberalism. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Riddle CA (2011) Responsibility and foundational material conditions. Am J Bioethics 11(7):53–55Google Scholar
  16. Riddle CA (2012) Measuring capabilities: the case of disability. In: Weidtmann N, Hölzchen YM, Hawa B (eds) The capability approach on social order. LIT Verlag, Munster, p 51Google Scholar
  17. Riddle CA (2013) Natural diversity and justice for people with disabilities. In: Schmitz B, Bickenbach J, Felder F (eds) Disability and the good human life. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  18. Ruger JP (2006) Toward a theory of a right to health: capability and incompletely theorized agreements. Yale J L Human 17:273–326Google Scholar
  19. Ruger JP (2009) Health and social justice. Oxford University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Satistics Canada Centre for Justice Statistics (1994) Wife assault: the findings of a national survey. Juristat 14:1–21Google Scholar
  21. Sen A (1995) Equality of what? In: Darwall S (ed) Equal freedom: selected tanner lectures on human values. University of Michigan Press, Ann ArborGoogle Scholar
  22. Venkatapuram S (2011) Health justice: an argument from the capabilities approach. Polity Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  23. Wolff J, De-Shalit A (2007) Disadvantage. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Department of PhilosophyUtica CollegeUticaUSA

Personalised recommendations