Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T23:05:34.575Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Fourth Subject Position of Care

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 March 2020

Samuel A. Butler
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Analyses of care work typically speak of three necessary roles of care: the care worker, the care recipient, and an economic provider who makes care materially possible. This model provides no place for addressing the difficult political questions care poses for liberal representative democracy. I propose to fill this space with a new caring role to connect the care unit to the political sphere, as the economic provider connects the care unit to the economic sphere. I call this role that of the “care claimant.” The labor of claiming care consists in the development, expression, and advancement of the interests of the care unit. The argument for employing this fourth care role begins by comparing Nel Noddings's phenomenological care unit to Sara Ruddick's family‐based analysis. It then moves to discuss the way Eva Kittay emphasizes the dependency of the charge and its political ramifications to illustrate the need for a care claimant. After distinguishing the care claimant from the other roles of care, I examine the power relationships in the care unit and the position of the care claimant in the public sphere.

Type
Open Issue Content
Information
Hypatia , Volume 27 , Issue 2 , Spring 2012 , pp. 390 - 406
Copyright
Copyright © 2012 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bradley, Greta, and Hojer, Staffan. 2009. Supervision reviewed: Reflections on two different social work models in England and Sweden. European Journal of Social Work 12(1): 71–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bubeck, Diemut. 1995. Care, gender, and justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Budig, Michelle J., and Folbré, Nancy. 2004. Activity, proximity, or responsibility? Measuring parental childcare time. In Family time: The social organization of care, ed. Folbré, Nancy and Bittman, Michael. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dalla Costa, Mariarosa, and James, Selma. 1975. The power of women and the subversion of the community. New York: Falling Wall Press.Google Scholar
Duffy, Mignon. 2010. “We are the union”: Care work, unions, and social movements. Humanity & Society 34(2): 125–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Folbré, Nancy, et al. 2005. By what measure? Family time devoted to children in the United States. Demography 42(2): 373–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Folbré, Nancy. 2008. Reforming care. Politics & Society 36(3): 373–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franséhn, Mona. 2007. The importance of supervision in social work: The example of Sweden. SP Sociálni Práce 4:72–8.Google Scholar
Gabriel, Satyananda. 1990. Ancients: A Marxian theory of self‐exploitation. Rethinking Marxism 3(1): 85–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herd, Pamela, and Harrington Meyer, Madonna. 2002. Care work: Invisible civic engagement. Gender & Society 16(5): 665–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirschmann, Nancy J. 2008. Mill, political economy, and women's work. American Political Science Review 102(2): 199–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kain, Philip J. 1993. Marx, housework, and alienation. Hypatia 8(1): 121–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karvinen‐Niinikoski, Synnöve. 2003. Social work supervision: Contributing to innovative knowledge production and open expertise. In Social work, critical reflection, and the learning organization, ed. Gould, Nick and Baldwin, Mark. Burlington, VT: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Kittay, Eva Feder. 1999. Love's labor: Essays on women, equality, and dependency. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kittay, Eva Feder. 2003. When caring is just and justice is caring: Justice and mental retardation. In The subject of care: Feminist perspectives on dependency, ed. Kittay, Eva Feder and Feder, Ellen K.New York: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Noddings, Nel. 1984. Caring: A feminine approach to ethics and moral education. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Noddings, Nel. 1992. The challenge to care in schools. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
Okin, Susan Moller. 1989. Justice, gender, and the family. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Pitts‐Taylor, Victoria, and Schaffer, Talia, eds. 2009. Classics revisited: Sara Ruddick's Maternal thinking: Toward a politics of peace. Women's Studies Quarterly 37(3/4): 295–308.Google Scholar
Ruddick, Sara. 1989. Maternal thinking. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Schor, Juliet B. 1998. Time squeeze: The extra month of work. In Families in the U.S.: Kinship and domestic politics, ed. Hansen, Karen V. and Garey, Anita Ilta. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, Adam. 17761994. The wealth of nations. New York: Modern Library.Google Scholar