12.2 Major Themes and Principles of Care Ethics

The field of care ethics is quite broad and still relatively new and as such not as clearly defined as other theories we have explored. Though not every care theorist will agree with all of them, there remain, in looking at the literature, several important themes or principles that seem prominent in the literature.-=

The Importance of Relationships

Care ethicists believe that individuals are fundamentally shaped by their relationships and interdependencies with others, rather than being autonomous, independent agents. They critique the classical liberal notion of the individual as a self-sufficient, autonomous agent. They argue this is a fiction that ignores the reality of our deep interdependence. Rather than viewing persons as discrete, isolated entities, care ethicists propose a “relational ontology” — the view that individuals are constituted by their webs of social relationships and dependencies. They emphasize that our identities, values, and moral sensibilities emerge through our particular, situated relationships and social contexts — not from abstract, universal principles. Thinkers like Eva Feder Kittay and Virginia Held point out that we are all radically dependent on others for care and support throughout our lives, from infancy to old age. This interdependence is an inescapable part of the human condition. Scholars like Joan Tronto analyze the moral import of traditional “caring” activities like childrearing, eldercare, and disability support. These reveal the centrality of interdependence in human social life.

The Desire to Care as the Primary Moral Motivation

The primary moral motivation in care ethics is the desire to care for and meet the needs of others, rather than to obey abstract principles or rules. We are moved to act morally by our felt connections to particular others. Virginia Held argued that the desire to maintain and enhance caring relations should be the primary aim of ethics, rather than the more abstract goals of traditional moral theories like justice or utility maximization. Marilyn Friedman claimed that the sentiment of care, rather than rational moral principles, should be the driving force behind moral decision-making, as it arises from our felt connections to others. This motive separates care ethics greatly from Utilitarianism’s goal of seeking the greatest good for the many or Kant’s goal of acting from pure duty.

The Importance of Context

Care ethics focuses on the particular details and contexts of moral situations, rather than trying to apply universal moral principles regardless of a situation. This contextualization makes care ethics quite flexible but might open it to charges of being too loose. Gilligan’s groundbreaking work critiqued the decontextualized, rule-based moral frameworks of thinkers like Kohlberg. She argued that women’s moral reasoning focused more on the contextual details of relationships and specific situations. Joan Tronto’s influential work stressed the need to attend to the concrete, contextual “phases” of care practices – caring about, caring for, care-giving, and care-receiving – rather than applying universal principles. Virginia Held argued that the ethics of care should be based on the actual relationships and social contexts in which people are embedded, rather than on abstract individual rights or utilitarian calculations.

Emotions and Empathy

Thinkers like Nel Noddings and Marilyn Friedman assert that emotions like empathy, compassion, and care are central to moral motivation, not just cold reason. Noddings, one of the foundational figures of care ethics, argued that caring – an emotion-laden relation of “engrossment” and “motivational displacement” – should be the central ethical value, rather than abstract moral principles. Friedman contended that empathy, compassion, and other moral sentiments are vital to our ability to perceive and respond to the needs of others, which should be the focus of ethics. Virginia Held criticized traditional moral theories for privileging rationality over emotion. She claimed that emotions like care, trust, and solidarity are indispensable to the web of social relationships that constitute morality.

Embodiedness

Care ethicists have emphasized the importance of “bodiliness” and embodied experience in moral deliberation and decision-making. They argue that we are all fundamentally embodied, physical beings who are dependent on others for care, sustenance, and support throughout our lives. This bodily vulnerability and need are core aspects of the human condition. In contrast to abstract moral principles, care ethicists say we must attend to the particular, contextual details of people’s embodied situations and physical needs when making moral judgments. Because of this, many highlight the moral value of traditionally feminine “caring labor” like nursing, childcare, and elder care – activities that centrally involve attending to human embodied needs and vulnerabilities. Many care ethicists also critique the Cartesian mind/body dualism that has dominated Western philosophy. They argue this dualism devalues the moral significance of embodied, physical persons. Thinkers like Eva Feder Kittay emphasize our shared, universal experience of physical dependency and the common vulnerability of the human body across the lifespan. This embodiedness links our bodiliness to the importance of emotions like empathy, compassion, and care – which arise from our embodied, relational experience of the world.

A Care Scenario

Here’s an example of how a care ethicist might approach a moral dilemma using the values of relationships, emotions, and embodiedness:

The Scenario: A family is caring for an elderly grandmother with dementia at home. The grandmother has become incontinent and is occasionally aggressive due to her condition. The family is struggling to provide the level of care she needs, and there are concerns about the grandmother’s safety and the family’s wellbeing. The family is considering placing the grandmother in a nursing home but feels guilt and uncertainty about this decision.

A Care Ethicist would approach this case this way:

1. Relationships – A care ethicist would emphasize the importance of the family’s existing relationship and history of caregiving with the grandmother. They would consider how this long-term bond and the family’s sense of responsibility should shape the decision.
2. Emotions – The care ethicist would give central weight to the family’s emotional experience – the love, guilt, fear, and exhaustion they are feeling. They would see these emotions as vital moral data, not just irrational factors to be overcome.
3. Embodiedness – The care ethicist would closely attend to the embodied realities facing both the grandmother and the family members – the grandmother’s physical and cognitive decline, the physical demands of her care, and the toll it is taking on the family’s own bodies and health.
4. Contextual Reasoning – Rather than applying a universal rule like “always care for elderly family at home,” the care ethicist would deeply consider the specific context – the family’s resources, the grandmother’s condition, the impacts on all involved.
5. Moral Motivation – The care ethicist would judge the family’s decision based on whether it stems from a genuine desire to provide the best, most caring outcome for the grandmother and sustain the family’s ability to care, rather than abstract principles.
6. Responsibility and Attentiveness – The care ethicist would focus on the family’s ongoing responsibility to remain attentive to the grandmother’s evolving needs and to thoughtfully revise their care approach as circumstances change.

In this way, a care ethicist would use the core values of care ethics to navigate this difficult situation, seeking the most caring, contextually-appropriate outcome rather than deferring to universal rules or calculations of utility.