This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Ashcroft, R. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Counterpoint: On Not Wanting to Be Injured and Insulted

Imperial College London, r.ashcroft@ imperial.ac.uk

In this article the author examines some of the political and philosophical strategies used in Gregor Wolbring's discussion (this issue) of disability rights approaches to bioethics, concentrating on his argument concerning the similarity of feminist and disability rights approaches to preimplantation and prenatal selection techniques. Altough supportive of Wolbring's general approach, the author suggests that there are some analytical problems in Wolbring's argument relating to the political efficacy of social constructionism and the concept of disability. The author believes that Wolbring's position may veer toward a radical individualism in bioethics that could undermine Wolbring's overall political project of advancing the rights and status of people with disabilities.

Journal of Disability Policy Studies, Vol. 14, No. 3, 181-184 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/10442073030140030801


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?