Download Care Ethics

UFP, Barcelona, 22nd May 2015
Feeling the difference:
care ethics, emotional information & sentencing real
people
Dr Helen Brown Coverdale FHEA
[email protected]
@helencoverdale
emotional information
– the missing pieces
Plea in mitigation
Pre-sentence report
Chinese whispers –
adding opportunity for misunderstanding
Interactional justice –
Feeling heard & included as equal
Interactional justice – Feeling included as equal
McIvor 2009 – Offenders’ responses
‘You don’t think you’re important enough to speak to a
Sheriff. Cos you open your mouth maybe in court and … they
would just go ‘silence’ (McIvor 2009, p.41 quoted offenders
response)
He’ll listen to your point of view and there’s not many Sheriffs
that will. He looks through the addiction, I think, and sees the
person who is there.’ (McIvor 2009, p.41 quoted offenders
response)
‘what’s good about it is because I’m getting treated now like
a human being and an equal.’ (McIvor 2009, p.43 quoted
offenders response)
Mair & Millings 2011 – Offenders’ responses
At the mainstream court:
‘I know [nothing] of what’s happening, sometimes I don’t
even speak and like they’ve done it all and I’m on my way
and still don’t know what’s happened’ (Mair & Millings 2011,
p.78)
At the problem-solving court:
‘They pay more attention and they seem interested in what
you say, even the bizzies here treat you with respect’ (Mair &
Millings 2011, p.77)
Visualising Care Ethics
Practice
Values
CARE
Attitude
Integrity
Traditional decision-making
Helen Brown Coverdale
[email protected]
Care Ethics
Relationships
11th February 2012
Care Ethics
Relationships
Care Ethics
Needs?
Housing?
skills?
Health?
Employment?
Care Ethics
Relationships
Interdependency
Care Ethics
Relationships
Interdependency
Responsibility
Care Ethics
Relationships
Interdependency
Responsibility
Changes with time
Care Ethics
Core themes
•Rationality
•Interdependency
•Responsibilities
•Situatedness
Practices
•Valuing emotional
information
•Listening
•Iterative practice
Care Ethics: resonances
Therapeutic jurisprudence:
Drug Courts
•Regular, responsive,
supportive contact between
sentencer and offender
•Medical model paradigmatic
of caring practice
•Requires :
Desistance paradigm:
•Supportive practitioneroffender relationships
require:
•Valuing emotional
information
•Listening
•Iterative practice
Context: Emotional, Personal, Social Information
Risks:
May give rise to:
• Bias
• Prejudice
• Interpreting need as Risk
• Coerced care in some
case?
Context: Emotional, Personal, Social Information
Risks:
May give rise to:
• Bias
• Prejudice
• Interpreting need as Risk
• Coerced care in some
case?
Responses:
•Care ethics reflexive and
reflective review practices
•Basic rights
•Principle of protecting the
vulnerable
•Developments in therapeutic
& problem-solving
jurisprudence
•More research needed