A Practical Ethics of Care: Tinkering with Different ‘Goods’ in Residential Nursing Homes
In this paper, we argue that ‘good care’ in residential nursing homes is enacted through different care practices that are either inspired by a ‘professional logic of care’ that aims for justice and non-maleficence in the professional treatment of residents, or by a ‘relational logic of care’, which attends to the relational quality and the meaning of interpersonal connectedness in people’s lives. Rather than favoring one care logic over the other, this paper indicates how important aspects of care are constantly negotiated between different care practices. Based on the intricate everyday negotiations observed during an ethnographic field study at an elderly nursing home in Germany, the paper puts forth the argument that care is always a matter of tinkering with different, sometimes competing ‘goods’. This tinkering process, which unfolds through ‘intuitive deliberation’, ‘situated assessment’ and ‘affective juggling’ is then theorized along the conceptualization of a ‘practical ethics of care’: an ethics which makes no a priori judgments of what may be considered as good or bad care, but instead calls for momentary judgments that are pliable across changing situations.
KeywordsProfessional logic of care Relational logic of care Ethics of care Practical ethics Tinkering Residential nursing homes
We would like to express our sincere gratitude to the section editor Raza Mir and the anonymous reviewers who have guided our revision process in a most constructive and collegial manner. Moreover, we would like to thank Gazi Islam and Marianna Fotaki for their friendly reviews and helpful comments of an earlier version of this paper, which was presented at the 33rd EGOS Colloquium (2017) in Copenhagen. We would especially like to thank our colleagues Mark Laukamm, Julia Nentwich, Christina Lüthy, Björn Müller and Florian Schulz who supported us with their substantial feedback during our writing process. Funding was provided by the Swiss National Science Foundation.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
All authors declared that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Benner, P. (2000). The wisdom of our practice. American Journal of Nursing, 100(10), 99–103.Google Scholar
- Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice (R. Nice, Trans.). Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
- Bourdieu, P. (1998). Practical reason: On the theory of action. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
- Brugère, F. (2006). La sollicitude. La nouvelle donne affective des perspectives féministes. Esprit, 123–140.Google Scholar
- Card, C. (1999). On feminist ethics and politics. Kansas: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
- Darling, J. (2010). “Just being there…”: Ethics, experimentation, and the cultivation of care. In B. Anderson & P. Harrison (Eds.), Taking-place: Non-representational theories and geography (pp. 241–260). Surrey: Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
- Fox, N. (1999). Beyond health, postmodernism and embodiment. London: Free Association Press.Google Scholar
- Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Held, V. (2006). The ethics of care: Personal, political, and global. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Kittay, E. F., & Feder, E. K. (2003). The subject of care: Feminist perspectives on dependency. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
- McMurray, R. (2015). Care as politics. In A. Pullen & C. Rhodes (Eds.), The Routledge companion to ethics, politics and organizations (pp. 318–334). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). The phenomenology of perception. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Mol, A. (2010). Care and its values. Good food in the nursing home. In A. Mol, I. Moser & J. Pols (Eds.), Care in practice: On tinkering in clinics, homes and farms (pp. 215–234). Bielefeld: transcript Verlag.Google Scholar
- Mol, A., Moser, I., & Pols, J. (2010). Care: Putting practice into theory. In A. Mol, I. Moser & J. Pols (Eds.), Care in practice: On tinkering in clinics, homes and farms (pp. 7–27). Bielefeld: transcript Verlag.Google Scholar
- Moser, I. (2010). Perhaps tears should not be counted but wiped away: On quality and improvement in dementia care. In A. Mol, I. Moser & J. Pols (Eds.), Care in practice: On tinkering in clinics, homes and farms (pp. 277–300). Bielefeld: transcript Verlag.Google Scholar
- Nicolini, D. (2013). Practice theory, work, and organization: An introduction. Oxford Oxford: University Press.Google Scholar
- Paperman, P. (2005). Les gens vulnérables n’ont rien d’exceptionnel. In P. Paperman & S. Laugier (Eds.), Le souci des autres. Ethique et politique du care. Raisons Pratiques (pp. 281–297). Paris: Editions de l’Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales.Google Scholar
- Ruddick, S. (1998). Care as labor and relationship. In M. S. Halfon & J. C. Haber (Eds.), Norms and values: Essays on the work of Virginia Held (pp. 3–25). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
- Sandberg, J., & Tsoukas, H. (2011). Grasping the logic of practice: Theorizing through practical rationality. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 338–360.Google Scholar
- Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
- Simonsen, K. (2010). Encountering O/other bodies: Practice, emotion and ethics. In B. Anderson & P. Harrison (Eds.), Taking-place: Non-representational theories and geography (pp. 221–240). Surrey: Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
- Tronto, J. C. (1993). Moral boundaries: A political argument for an ethic of care. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Vachhani, S. (2015). Working the grey zones. In A. Pullen & C. Rhodes (Eds.), The Routledge companion to ethics, politics and organizations (pp. 479–493). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Verkerk, M. A. (2007). Care ethics as a feminist perspective on bioethics. In C. E. A. Gastmans (Ed.), New pathways for European bioethics (pp. 65–81). Antwerpen/Oxford: Intersentia.Google Scholar
- Walker, M. U. (2007). Moral understandings: A feminist study in ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Watson, M. (2017). Placing power in practice theory. In A. Hui, T. Schatzki & E. Shove (Eds.), The nexus of practices: Connections, constellations, practitioners (pp. 169–182). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Winance, M. (2010). Care and disability. Practices of experimenting, tinkering with, and arranging people and technical aids. In A. Mol, I. Moser & J. Pols (Eds.), Care in practice: On tinkering in clinics, homes and farms (pp. 93–117). Bielefeld: transcript Verlag.Google Scholar