Abstract
In a journal article ‘People with cognitive disabilities: The argument from marginal cases and social work ethics’, Gerald O’Brien (2003, p. 335, emphasis added) writes: Seeking to engage the public in questioning our consideration and treatment of animals is fine, as long as vulnerable humans are not harmed in the process. Unfortunately, the animal rights movement, invested as it is in the AMC [Argument from Marginal Cases], cannot guarantee this. As it is described in the writings of animal rights scholars, the AMC is in opposition to core social work values and must be vigorously challenged by members of the profession. The dignity and worth of people living on the margins of society is diminished when we bestow quasi-human status on them or suggest that their moral standing is comparable to animals. KeywordsSocial WorkMoral CommunityCognitive DisabilityMoral StandingMarginal CaseThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
