Image de Google Jackets
Vue normale Vue MARC vue ISBD

Expertise in legal (in)capacity? A comparison between France and Quebec

Par : Contributeur(s) : Type de matériel : TexteTexteLangue : français Détails de publication : 2020. Ressources en ligne : Abrégé : Comparative studies on health and social welfare issues have led to the development of models pertaining to the socio-political organization of the welfare state, especially ones that take into account the cost of caring for vulnerable people. Few, however, have focused on the place of civil and political rights in their comparisons.Beyond the increase in the number of legal constraints in many Western countries, recognizing legal (in)capacity raises the question of the repercussions that situations of disability, dependency or illness can have on vulnerable people’s ability to exercise their rights. More broadly, it reveals the very real tensions resulting from the coexistence of ideals that are difficult to articulate to one another, such as autonomy and protection, or solidarity and freedom.This article draws a socio-historical comparison of the evolution of modes of recognition of legal (in)capacity in France and in Quebec. It sheds light on the role of “expert” actors and knowledge in the process of clinically assessing (in)capacity, as well as on that of international human rights experts, by highlighting the salient elements of three modes of recognition of (in)capacity. It puts into perspective contemporary connections and tensions between clinical concern for vulnerable people and respect for their rights.
Tags de cette bibliothèque : Pas de tags pour ce titre. Connectez-vous pour ajouter des tags.
Evaluations
    Classement moyen : 0.0 (0 votes)
Nous n'avons pas d'exemplaire de ce document

27

Comparative studies on health and social welfare issues have led to the development of models pertaining to the socio-political organization of the welfare state, especially ones that take into account the cost of caring for vulnerable people. Few, however, have focused on the place of civil and political rights in their comparisons.Beyond the increase in the number of legal constraints in many Western countries, recognizing legal (in)capacity raises the question of the repercussions that situations of disability, dependency or illness can have on vulnerable people’s ability to exercise their rights. More broadly, it reveals the very real tensions resulting from the coexistence of ideals that are difficult to articulate to one another, such as autonomy and protection, or solidarity and freedom.This article draws a socio-historical comparison of the evolution of modes of recognition of legal (in)capacity in France and in Quebec. It sheds light on the role of “expert” actors and knowledge in the process of clinically assessing (in)capacity, as well as on that of international human rights experts, by highlighting the salient elements of three modes of recognition of (in)capacity. It puts into perspective contemporary connections and tensions between clinical concern for vulnerable people and respect for their rights.

PLUDOC

PLUDOC est la plateforme unique et centralisée de gestion des bibliothèques physiques et numériques de Guinée administré par le CEDUST. Elle est la plus grande base de données de ressources documentaires pour les Étudiants, Enseignants chercheurs et Chercheurs de Guinée.

Adresse

627 919 101/664 919 101

25 boulevard du commerce
Kaloum, Conakry, Guinée

Réseaux sociaux

Powered by Netsen Group @ 2025