Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Rehabilitation: disability ethics versus Peter Singer.

Gary W McPherson1, Dick Sobsey

  • 1Canadian Centre for Social Entrepreneurship, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
|August 15, 2003
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

An international perspective on patterns of sexual assault and abuse of people with disabilities.

International journal of adolescent medicine and health·2012
Same author

Ethics or advocacy?

The American journal of bioethics : AJOB·2010
See all related articles

This commentary critiques Peter Singer's utilitarian bioethics, specifically his views on personhood and disability. Singer's ideas challenge the ethical status of individuals with disabilities and the morality of rehabilitation, raising critical concerns for the disability community.

Area of Science:

  • Bioethics
  • Disability Studies
  • Moral Philosophy

Background:

  • This commentary examines the utilitarian bioethical framework proposed by Peter Singer.
  • Singer's controversial concepts of personhood and replaceability are discussed in relation to individuals with disabilities.
  • The implications of Singer's views for caregivers and the field of rehabilitation are explored.

Discussion:

  • Singer's argument that individuals with severe disabilities may not be considered persons and lack ethical rights is presented.
  • The commentary addresses Singer's view that eliminating individuals with less severe disabilities could be ethically justifiable to reallocate resources.
  • The authors critically analyze these positions, highlighting their profound impact on the perception and practice of rehabilitation.

Key Insights:

Keywords:
Bioethics and Professional EthicsHealth Care and Public Health

Related Experiment Videos

  • Singer's bioethics challenges the inherent value and rights of people with disabilities.
  • The concept of 'replaceability' in Singer's utilitarianism raises ethical concerns regarding disability.
  • These bioethical viewpoints suggest that rehabilitation might be deemed immoral if it doesn't achieve full, typical function.

Outlook:

  • Further dialogue is needed on the ethical considerations of bioethics and disability.
  • Rehabilitation professionals must critically engage with bioethical theories that impact their practice.
  • A re-evaluation of personhood and rights within bioethical frameworks is essential for inclusivity.