Journal of Bioethical Inquiry

, Volume 9, Issue 3, pp 339–355 | Cite as

The Case for Conserving Disability

Original Research
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

It is commonly believed that disability disqualifies people from full participation in or recognition by society. This view is rooted in eugenic logic, which tells us that our world would be a better place if disability could be eliminated. In opposition to this position, I argue that that disability is inherent in the human condition and consider the bioethical question of why we might want to conserve rather than eliminate disability from our shared world. To do so, I draw together an eclectic, rather than systematic, configuration of counter-eugenic arguments for conserving disability. The idea of preserving intact, keeping alive, and even encouraging to flourish denoted by conserve suggests that disabilities would be better understood as benefits rather than deficits. I present, then, a reading of disability as a potentially generative resource rather than unequivocally restrictive liability. In other words, what I consider here is the cultural and material contributions disability offers to the world.

Keywords

Queer health Disability Bioethics Community 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Agar, N. 2004. Liberal eugenics: In defence of human enhancement. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  2. Alaimo, S., and S. Hekman, eds. 2008. Material feminisms. Bloomington: Indiana University.Google Scholar
  3. Alcoff, L. 2005. Visible identities: Race, gender, and the self. New York: Oxford University.Google Scholar
  4. Bagenstos, S.R. 2009. Law and the contradictions of the Disability Rights Movement. New Haven: Yale University.Google Scholar
  5. Barad, K.M. 2007. Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham: Duke University.Google Scholar
  6. Bauman, Z. 1989. Modernity and the Holocaust. Ithaca: Cornell University.Google Scholar
  7. Baynton, D. 2001. Disability and the justification of inequality in American history. In The new disability history, ed. P. Longmore and L. Umansky, 33–57. New York: New York University.Google Scholar
  8. Beauchamp, T., and J. Childress. 1994. Principles of biomedical ethics, 4th edition. New York: Oxford University.Google Scholar
  9. Beniger, J.R. 1986. The control revolution: Technological and economic origins of the information society. Cambridge: Harvard University.Google Scholar
  10. Black, E. 2003. War against the weak: Eugenics and America’s campaign to create a master race. New York: Four Walls Eight Windows.Google Scholar
  11. Bruinius, H. 2007. Better for all the world: The secret history of forced sterilization and America’s quest for racial purity. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
  12. Buchanan, A., D. Brock, N. Daniels, and D. Wikler. 2000. From chance to choice: Genetics and justice. New York: Cambridge University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Canguilhem, G. 1989. The normal and the pathological. New York: Zone Books.Google Scholar
  14. Christ, C.P., and J. Plaskow, eds. 1979. Womanspirit rising: A feminist reader in religion. San Francisco: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  15. Clark, E.B. 1995. “The sacred rights of the weak”: Pain, sympathy, and the culture of individual pain in antebellum America. The Journal of American History 82(2): 463–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cogdell, C. 2004. Eugenic design: Streamlining America in the 1930s. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  17. Collins, P.H. 2000. Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment, 2nd edition. Routledge: New York.Google Scholar
  18. Davis, L. 1995. Enforcing normalcy: Disability, deafness, and the body. London, New York: Verso.Google Scholar
  19. Dick, K., director. 2003. Sick: The life and death of Bob Flanagan, supermasochist. Santa Monica, CA: Lions Gate Home Entertainment.Google Scholar
  20. Eiesland, N. 1994. The disabled god: Toward a liberatory theology of disability. Nashville: Abingdon.Google Scholar
  21. Elliott, C. 2003. Better than well: American medicine meets the American dream. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  22. Fausto-Sterling, A. 2000. Sexing the body: Gender politics and the construction of sexuality. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  23. Fiedler, L. 1978. Freaks: Myths and images of the secret self. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  24. Fontes, M. 1998. Disabled people are strangers in their own land. The World Association for Christian Communication’s Media Development, no. 2. http://waccglobal.org/en/19982-communication-and-disability/884-Disabled-people-are-strangers-in-their-own-land--.html. Accessed May 9, 2012.
  25. Frank, A. 1995. The wounded storyteller: Body, illness, and ethics. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  26. Freud, S. 1916. Some character-types met with in psycho-analytic work. In The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud, Volume XIV (1914–1916): On the history of the psycho-analytic movement, papers on metapsychology and other works, ed. J. Strachey, 309–333. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  27. Friedlander, H. 1995. The origins of Nazi genocide: From euthanasia to the final solution. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina.Google Scholar
  28. Gabbard, C. 2010. A life beyond reason. The Chronicle of Higher Education: The Chronicle Review, November 7. http://chronicle.com/article/article-content/125242/. Accessed May 9, 2012.
  29. Garden, R. 2007. The problem of empathy: Medicine and the humanities. New Literary History 38(3): 551–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Garland-Thomson, R. 2004. The cultural logic of euthanasia: “Sad Fancyings” in Herman Melville’s “Bartleby.” American Literature 76(4): 777–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Garland-Thomson, R. 2011. Misfits: A feminist materialist disability concept. Hypatia 26(3): 591–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gerhart, K.A., J. Koziol-McLain, S.R. Lowenstein, and G.G. Whiteneck. 1994. Quality of life following spinal cord injury: Knowledge and attitudes of emergency care providers. Annals of Emergency Medicine 23(4): 807–812.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gilligan, C. 1982. In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Cambridge: Harvard University.Google Scholar
  34. Gilman, C.P. 1979. Herland. New York: Patheon Books.Google Scholar
  35. Goffman, E. 1986. Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  36. Habermas, J. 2003. The future of human nature. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  37. Habermas, J. 2008. Between naturalism and religion: Philosophical essays. Malden: Polity.Google Scholar
  38. Hacking, I. 2010. How we have been learning to talk about autism: A role for stories. In Cognitive disability and its challenge to moral philosophy, ed. E. Kittay and L. Carlson, 261–279. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  39. Halttunen, K. 1995. Humanitarianism and the pornography of pain in Anglo-American culture. The American Historical Review 100(2): 303–334.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Haskell, T.L. 1985a. Capitalism and the origins of the humanitarian sensibility, part 1. The American Historical Review 90(2): 339–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Haskell, T.L. 1985b. Capitalism and the origins of the humanitarian sensibility, part 2. The American Historical Review 90(3): 547–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Held, V. 2006. The ethics of care: Personal, political, and global. Oxford and New York: Oxford University.Google Scholar
  43. Hennessy, R., and C, Ingraham, eds. 1997. Materialist feminism: A reader in class, difference, and women’s lives. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  44. Hvistendahl, M. 2011. Unnatural Selection: Choosing boys over girls, and the consequences of a world full of men. New York: PublicAffairs.Google Scholar
  45. Johnson, H.M. 2005. Too late to die young: Nearly true tales from a life. New York: Henry Holt and Co.Google Scholar
  46. Keller, H. 2009. The world I live in and optimism: A collection of essays. Mineola: Dover Publications.Google Scholar
  47. Kevles, D. 1985. In the name of eugenics: Genetics and the uses of human heredity. Cambridge: Harvard University.Google Scholar
  48. Kim, S., E. Polman, and J. Sanchez-Burks. 2012. When truisms are true. The New York Times, February 25. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/26/opinion/sunday/when-truisms-are-true.html. Accessed May 9, 2012.
  49. Kitcher, P. 1996. The lives to come: The genetic revolution and human possibilities. New York: Touchstone.Google Scholar
  50. Kittay, E., and D. Meyers. 1987. Women and moral theory. Totowa: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  51. Klaus, P. 2012. A chance to see disabilities as assets. The New York Times, February 4. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/05/jobs/disabilities-can-be-workplace-assets.html. Accessed June 3, 2012.
  52. Kristeva, J., and J. Herman. 2010. Liberty, equality, fraternity, and … vulnerability. Women’s Studies Quarterly 38(1/2): 251–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Levin, J. 2011. The invisible hate crime. Miller-McCune, March 1. https://www.miller-mccune.com/legal-affairs/the-invisible-hate-crime-27984/. Accessed May 9, 2012.
  54. Mitchell, D., and S. Snyder. 2003. The eugenic atlantic: Race, disability, and the making of an international eugenic science, 1800–1945. Disability & Society 18(7): 843–864.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Mitchell, D., and S. Snyder. 2000. Narrative prosthesis: Disability and the dependencies of discourse. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  56. Morris, D.B. 1993. The culture of pain. Berkeley: University of California.Google Scholar
  57. Nagel, T. 1986. The view from nowhere. New York: Oxford University.Google Scholar
  58. Nussbaum, M. 2006. Frontiers of justice: Disability, nationality, species membership. Cambridge: Harvard University.Google Scholar
  59. O’Connor, F. 1969. Mystery and manners: Occasional prose. Ed. S. Fitzgerald and R. Fitzgerald. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.Google Scholar
  60. Orsi, R. 2005. Between heaven and earth: The religious worlds people make and the scholars who study them. Princeton: Princeton University.Google Scholar
  61. Oxford English Dictionary. 2000. Oxford University Press. http://dictionary.oed.com/entrance.dtl.
  62. Parens, E. 1998. Enhancing human traits: Ethical and social implications. Washington: Georgetown University.Google Scholar
  63. Parens, E. 2005. Authenticity and ambivalence: Toward understanding the enhancement debate. The Hastings Center Report 35(3): 34–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Parens, E. 2006. Surgically shaping children: Technology, ethics, and the pursuit of normality. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University.Google Scholar
  65. Parsons, T. 1951. The social system. Glencoe: Free Press.Google Scholar
  66. Pernick, M.S. 1985. A calculus of suffering: Pain, professionalism, and anesthesia in nineteenth century America. New York: Columbia University.Google Scholar
  67. Rapp, E. 2007. Poster child: A memoir. New York: Holtzbrinck Publishers.Google Scholar
  68. Rapp, E.. 2011. Notes from a dragon mom. The New York Times, October 15. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/16/opinion/sunday/notes-from-a-dragon-mom.html. Accesed May 9, 2012.
  69. Rapp, E. 2012. Rick Santorum, meet my son. Slate Magazine Online, February 27. http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/02/rick_santorum_and_prenatal_testing_i_would_have_saved_my_son_from_his_suffering_.html. Accessed February 27, 2012.
  70. Robertson, J. 1994. Children of choice: Freedom and the new reproductive technologies. Princeton: Princeton University.Google Scholar
  71. Rose, N. 2007. Politics of life itself: Biomedicine, power, and subjectivity in the twenty-first century. Princeton: Princeton University.Google Scholar
  72. Sandel, M. 2007. The case against perfection: Ethics in the age of genetic engineering. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University.Google Scholar
  73. Saramago, J. 1999. Blindness. Trans. G. Pontiero. San Diego: Harcourt Brace & Co. Originally published as Ensaio sobre a cegueira (Lisbon: Editorial Caminho, 1995).Google Scholar
  74. Saiving, V. 1979. The human situation: A feminist view. In Womanspirit rising: A feminist reader in religion, eds. C.P. Christ and J. Plaskow, 25–42. San Francisco: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  75. Schipper, J. 2006. Disability studies and the Hebrew Bible: Figuring Mephibosheth in the David story. New York: T&T Clark.Google Scholar
  76. Schipper, J. 2011. Disability and Isaiah’s suffering servant. New York: Oxford University.Google Scholar
  77. Scotch, R. 1984. From good will to civil rights: Transforming federal disability policy. Philadelphia: Temple University.Google Scholar
  78. Scully, J.L. 2008. Disability bioethics: Moral bodies, moral difference. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  79. Shapiro, J. 1993. No pity: People with disabilities forging a new civil rights movement. New York: Three Rivers Press.Google Scholar
  80. Snyder, S., and D. Mitchell. 2006. Cultural locations of disability. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  81. Straus, J. 2011. Extraordinary measures: Disability in music. New York: Oxford University.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Women’s StudiesEmory UniversityAtlantaUSA
  2. 2.AY 2011-2012 Contact, Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study FellowCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations