Filial obligations to elderly parents: a duty to care?

A continuing need for care for elderly, combined with looser family structures prompt the question what filial obligations are. Do adult children of elderly have a duty to care? Several theories of filial obligation are reviewed. The reciprocity argument is not sensitive to the parent–child relationship after childhood. A theory of friendship does not offer a correct parallel for the relationship between adult child and elderly parent. Arguments based on need or vulnerability run the risk of being unjust to those on whom a needs-based claim is laid. To compare filial obligations with promises makes too much of parents’ expectations, however reasonable they may be. The good of being in an unchosen relationship seems the best basis for filial obligations, with an according duty to maintain the relationship when possible. We suggest this relationship should be maintained even if one of the parties is no longer capable of consciously contributing to it. We argue that this entails a duty to care about one’s parents, not for one’s parents. This implies that care for the elderly is not in the first place a task for adult children

Beyond individualism:Is there a place for relational autonomy in clinical practice and research?

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from SAGE Publications via the DOI in this recordThe dominant, individualistic understanding of autonomy that features in clinical practice and research is underpinned by the idea that people are, in their ideal form, independent, self-interested and rational gain-maximising decision-makers. In recent decades, this paradigm has been challenged from various disciplinary and intellectual directions. Proponents of ‘relational autonomy’ in particular have argued that people’s identities, needs, interests – and indeed autonomy – are always also shaped by their relations to others. Yet, despite the pronounced and nuanced critique directed at an individualistic understanding of autonomy, this critique has had very little effect on ethical and legal instruments in clinical practice and research so far. In this article, we use four case studies to explore to what extent, if at all, relational autonomy can provide solutions to ethical and practical problems in clinical practice and research. We conclude that certain forms of relational autonomy can have a tangible and positive impact on clinical practice and research. These solutions leave the ultimate decision to the person most affected, but encourage and facilitate the consideration of this person’s care and responsibility for connected others.The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: ESD is supported by a Wellcome Senior Investigator Award ‘Confronting the Liminal Spaces of Health Research Regulation’ (Award No: WT103360MA)

The communicative functions of metaphors between explanation and persuasion

In the literature, the pragmatic dimension of metaphors has been clearly acknowledged. Metaphors are regarded as having different possible uses, and in particular, they are commonly viewed as instruments for pursuing persuasion. However, an analysis of the specific conversational purposes that they can be aimed at achieving in a dialogue and their adequacy thereto is still missing. In this paper, we will address this issue focusing on the distinction between the explanatory and persuasive goal. The difference between explanation and persuasion is often blurred and controversial from a theoretical point of view. Building on the analysis of explanation in different theories and fields of study, we show how it can be conceived as characterized by a cognitive and a pragmatic dimension, where the transference of understanding is used pragmatically for different dialogical goals. This theoretical proposal will be applied to examples drawn from the medical context, to show how a pragmatic approach to explanation can account for the complexity of the cases that can be found in actual dialogical contexts

Discursive Frameworks for the Development of Inclusive Robotics

Important ethical-political ideas are analysed in this contribution: autonomy, dependency, vulnerability, functioning, care and disability, within the relevant discursive frameworks for development of an inclusive robotics. This development will have to take into account the regulatory framework of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and prospectively orient itself towards facilitating autonomy in the achievement of human functionings in inclusive environments, guaranteeing the conditions for good care. To this end, it will be important to also pay attention to theoretical frameworks such as the capability approach (Sen, Nussbaum) and ethical conceptions of care (Tronto, Kittay). Additionally, we feel another social group that should be considered regarding the consequences coming from the introduction of robotics is the group made up of children and adolescents. For the responsible integration of inclusive and interactive robotics, as a mediating factor in the socialisation process, it is necessary to maintain careful protections in regard to the inherent vulnerability of this group; this requires that the general regulatory obligations regarding protection, full development and wellbeing underlying the discourse in the Convention on the Rights of the Child be used as a reference in order to always safeguard the greater interests of the minor.Peer reviewe