Vulnerability
Vulnerability Gives Rise to Moral Obligations And Duties of Justice
Vulnerability is defined in two perspectives. The first perspective was derived from the capacity of a human being to suffer or to be exposed to suffering and wounding. It is related to the organic nature of human beings as being susceptible to injury, diseases, disability and death. These situations make human being to depend on others for support and care. The second perspective of vulnerability focuses on the susceptibility of people to various types of threats and harm caused by others. It is based on the harm caused on one’s interests (Mackenzie et al., 2013). The degree of vulnerability however differs with the capacity of individuals to defend themselves from various threats based on their power, capacity, dependency and control.
Vulnerability Gives Rise to Moral Obligations And Duties of Justice
According to Mackenzie et al. (2013), vulnerability is assumed to be more pronounced among the lower people in power and capacity of dependency. This contrasts the theory of justice whose principles articulate that equal share of resources should be availed to all citizens regardless of their living status. Justice should not discriminate the more vulnerable persons from those high in power. The aspects of vulnerability such as need and harm raises the obligations of rising people’s satisfaction in their choices and interests. More obligations exist in defending the vulnerable from possible threats to their preferences. The ethics of care forms the bases for obligation. People therefore have a duty of care and response to the crucial needs of others and the way they are responded to. These needs include shelter, nutrition, education, bodily integrity, social participation and attachment. People need care since they depend on each other in an effort to meet their needs. This mutual dependency rises the obligation to give care to other people.
Primary Responsibility for Responding to Vulnerability
While responding to vulnerability, the primary responsibility lays with all those who are capable of assisting and more so the people who others are vulnerable to. The people who are in power and positions of authority have unique and more responsibility towards the people they exceed in power and who depend on them. Those in authority should not take advantage unfairly on the more vulnerable people especially in situations where the more powerful people control the resources solely depended upon by the more vulnerable. Children for example depend on their parents or guardians for protection and provision of their needs. In this case, the care givers and parents offer the primary role in responding to vulnerability (Mackenzie et al., 2013). The elderly also have their vulnerability responded to by their immediate care givers. Similarly, the unborn have the existing responding to their vulnerability with their actions.
How our Obligations to the Vulnerable are Best Fulfilled
Fulfillment of the obligations to the vulnerable would be best done by offering them social support with an aim of improving the persons’ autonomy. This would be through meeting their needs, protecting them from harm, preventing exploitation of the vulnerable and providing care to them. The response to vulnerability should be done in a respectable manner. Moral vulnerability, being the effect of rejection injury or denial of a person’s moral levels, is conquered through justice measures as a way of fulfilling obligation to the person’s vulnerability (Mackenzie et al., 2013). It is therefore important for one to understand the vulnerability concept for each case in order to determine how to best fulfill their obligations of care structures, justice, social practices or autonomy.
References
Mackenzie, C., Rogers, W., & Dodds, S. (2013-12-03). Introduction: What Is Vulnerability, and Why Does It Matter for Moral Theory? In Vulnerability: New Essays in Ethics and Feminist Philosophy, 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199316649.003.0001