Advertisement

Conclusion

  • Oche OnaziEmail author
Chapter
  • 34 Downloads
Part of the Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice book series (IUSGENT, volume 78)

Abstract

This chapter reflects on the implications of the argument of this book. It commences by identifying the prospects and limitations of human rights and capability approaches to disability justice, which have made it necessary to explore an alternative approach through African philosophy and African legal philosophy. Although presented as an alternative to the leading approaches, the legal philosophy of disability justice is presented as an internal critique of the literature on African philosophy. The main contribution of this book is best understood as an attempt to remedy the absence of the figure of the disabled person in the literature on African philosophy. After providing further reasons why the book has relied upon the relational conception of community to develop its proposed legal philosophy of disability justice, the chapter discusses some of the salient features of the argument. It concludes by discussing issues that the book has tried to avoid and responds to some objections to the argument of the book, as well as considering its implications for practice.

Keywords

Human rights Capabilities Disability justice Community African legal philosophy Dependency 

References

  1. Appiah K (2005) Ethics of identity. Princeton University Press, PrincetonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Appiah K (2010) The honor code: how moral revolutions happen. W.W. Norton and Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Bagenstos S (2009) Law and the contradictions of the disability rights movement. Yale University Press, New Haven, CTCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ball C (2000) Autonomy, justice, and disability. Univ Calif Los Angel Law Rev 47:599–651Google Scholar
  5. Barnes C (1991) Disabled people in Britain and discrimination: a case for anti-discrimination Legislation. Hurst and Co in Association with the British Council of Organisations of Disabled People, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Ladd J (1998) The idea of community, an ethical exploration, part I: The search for an elusive concept. The Journal of Value Inquiry 32:5–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Longmore P (2003) Why I burned my book and other essays on disability. Temple University Press, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  8. Malinga J (2003) The African view of independent living. Independent Living Institute, Sweden https://www.independentliving.org/docs6/malinga2003.html#2. Accessed 31 Jan 2019
  9. McCrary L (2017) Re-envisioning independence and community: critiques from the Independent Living Movement and L’Arche. J Soc Philos 48(3):377–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Mingus M (2011) Changing the framework of disability justice: How our communities can move beyond access to wholeness. https://leavingevidence.wordpress.com/2011/02/12/changing-the-framework-disability-justice/. Accessed 31 Jan 2019
  11. Mingus M (2017) Access intimacy, interdependence and disability justice: remarks at the Paul K Longmore Annual Lecture on Disability Studies, University of San Francisco, California. https://leavingevidence.wordpress.com/2017/04/12/access-intimacy-interdependence-and-disability-justice/. Accessed 31 Jan 2019
  12. Murphy R (1990) The body silent. W.W. Norton & Company Ltd., LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. Nussbaum M (2006) Frontiers of justice: disability, nationality and species membership. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  14. Nussbaum M (2011) Creating capabilities: the human development approach. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Oliver M (1989) Disability and dependency: a creation of industrial societies. In Len Barton (ed) Disability and Dependency. 6–22. Falmer, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. Rawls J (1985) Justice as fairness: political, not metaphysical. Philos Public Aff 14:223–251Google Scholar
  17. Shapiro J (1993) No pity: people with disabilities forging a new civil rights movement. Broadway Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Smith S (2001) The ‘problem of dependency’ and the mythology of independent living. Soc Theory Pract 27(4):579–598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Tangwa G (2000) The traditional African perception of a person: some implications for bioethics. Hast Cent Rep 30(5):39–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK

Personalised recommendations