Public Policy and the Ethics of Care

Abstract

Considered here are Eva Feder Kittay's Love's Labor (1999) and Mona Harrington's Care and Equality (1999). Although these books are written from very different disciplinary perspectives, Kittay and Harrington share conviction that public policy in United States must be altered to give more support not only to recipients of care-the young, old, ill, or disabled-but also to those who take care of them. Each presents a thoughtful critique of individualistic premises of classical liberal philosophy, and offers a persuasive reformulation that incorporates an understanding of human dependency. Each also presents concrete policy prescriptions rooted in that new understanding. Harrington and Kittay create a wonderfully paired set of books because they support their similar perspectives with radically different materials, a diversity that makes their arguments all more thought-provoking and convincing. Kittay is a philosopher; Harrington trained as a political scientist and lawyer. At core of Kittay's work is her contention that John Rawls's theory of justice is deficient because it does not understand that dependency and need to care for dependents are inescapable aspects of human condition. The heart of Harrington's work is a provocative interpretation of many of domestic policy initiatives and political crises of Clinton administration. Despite their different focuses, authors share conviction that philosophy matters to public policy. How we understand nature of human beings and principles of justice is reflected in law and social practice, and one of ways to improve policy is to improve our understanding of principles of justice. Kittay argues that condition of dependency affects not only those persons who are weak, ill, or disabled, but also those who take care of them. Rawls's depiction of original position fails to recognize that the conditions of human development, disease, and decline are . . . unalterable, as are