Human Rights and Autonomy

  • Lynelle WattsEmail author
  • David Hodgson


Human dignity and worth are important values for social workers, and these values are enshrined in many social work codes of ethics around the world. This often translates into discussions about human rights and service user self-determination, otherwise referred to as autonomy. Human rights have become a significant part of the global landscape. Given the fact that people live in plural societies, we need better ways to account for issues of rights, autonomy, difference and diversity with respect to equality and social justice. This chapter explores human rights and social work and considers the role that social work can take in relation to the potentials and limits of human rights instruments and agreements. Second, the chapter explores a related concept—autonomy—from liberal, Kantian and feminist perspectives. The centrality of autonomy as a socially and politically constituted phenomena is examined in relation to implications for social justice and human rights.


  1. Allen, A. (2008). The politics of our selves: Power, autonomy, and gender in contemporary critical theory. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Allen, A. (2011). Foucault and the politics of our selves. History of the Human Sciences, 24(4), 43–59. Scholar
  3. Australian Association of Social Workers. (2010). Code of ethics. Canberra, Australian Capital Territory: Australian Association of Social Workers.Google Scholar
  4. Ben-Ishai, E. (2008). The autonomy-fostering state: Citizenship and social service delivery. (Ph.D. Dissertation), University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.Google Scholar
  5. Benhabib, S. (1987). The generalized and concrete other. In S. Benhabib & D. Cornell (Eds.), Feminism as critique (pp. 77–95). Minneapolis, Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  6. Benhabib, S. (1992). Situating the self: Gender, community and postmodernism in contemporary ethics. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  7. Benhabib, S. (1999). Citizens, residents, and aliens in a changing world: Political membership in the global era. Social Research, 66(3), 709–744.Google Scholar
  8. Benhabib, S. (2015). From the right to have rights to the critique of humanitarian reason. Retrieved June 21, 2018, from
  9. Benhabib, S., & Cornell, D. (1987). Beyond the politics of gender. In S. Benhabib & D. Cornell (Eds.), Feminism as critique (pp. 1–15). Minneapolis, Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  10. Christman, J. (2018). Autonomy in moral and political philosophy. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring ed.).Google Scholar
  11. Dominelli, L. (2002). Feminist social work theory and practice. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Farris, C. J., & Dancy, G. (2017). Measuring the impact of human rights: Conceptual and methodological debates. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 13, 273–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Freyenhagen, F. (2017). Autonomy’s substance. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 34(1), 114–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gannon, S., & Davies, B. (2012). Postmodern, post-structural, and critical theories. In S. N. Heese-Biber (Ed.), Handbook of feminist research: Theory and praxis (pp. 65–92). Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications Inc.Google Scholar
  15. Griffiths, M. (1995). Feminisms and the self: The web of identity. New York, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Healy, L. M. (2008). Exploring the history of social work as a human rights profession. International Social Work, 51(6), 735–748. Scholar
  17. Heywood, A. (1998). Political ideologies: An introduction (2nd ed.). Houndsmills: Macmillan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Heywood, A. (2000). Key concepts in politics. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  19. Ife, J. (1999). Postmodernism, critical theory and social work. In B. Pease & J. Fook (Eds.), Transforming social work practice: Postmodern critical perspectives (pp. 211–223). Allen & Unwin: St Leonards, New South Wales.Google Scholar
  20. Ife, J. (2012). Human rights and social work: Towards rights-based practice (3rd ed.). Port Melbourne, Australia: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kant, I. ([1785]1952). Fundamental principles of the metaphysic of morals (T. K. Abbott, Trans.). Chicago, Illinois: Encyclopaedia Britannica Inc.Google Scholar
  22. Laden, A. (2001). Reasonably radical: Deliberative liberalism and the politics of identity. New York, USA: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Laden, A. S. (2005). Taking the distinction between persons seriously. In T. Brooks, & F. Freyenhagen (Eds.), The legacy of John Rawls (pp. 50–66). London, New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  24. Lamont, M., Guetzkow, J. A., & Herzog, H. (2016). Getting respect: Responding to stigma and discrimination in the United States, Brazil, and Israel. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Nicholson, L. (1987). Feminism and Marx: Integrating kinship with the economic. In S. Benhabib & D. Cornell (Eds.), Feminism as critique (pp. 16–30). Minneapolis, Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  26. Nipperess, S. (2013). Human rights: A challenge to critical social work practice and education. (Ph.D.), Perth, Western Australia: Curtin University.Google Scholar
  27. Nyland, C. (1994). Beatrice Webb as feminist. Working Paper (p. 41). Wollongong, New South Wales: University of Wollongong.Google Scholar
  28. O’Manique, C., & Fourie, P. (2016). Affirming our world: Gender, justice, social reproduction and the sustainable development goals. Development., 59(1–2), 121–126. Scholar
  29. O’Neill, O. (1986). The public use of reason. Political Theory, 14(4), 523–551. Scholar
  30. O’Neill, O. (1995). Justice, capabilities, and vulnerabilities. In M. C. Nussbaum & J. Glover (Eds.), Women, culture, and development: A study of human capabilities (pp. 140–154). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. O’Neill, O. (1996). Towards justice and virtue: A constructive account of practical reasoning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. O’Neill, O. (2015). Response to John Tasioulas. In R. Cruft, M. Liao, & M. Renzo (Eds.), Philosophical foundations of human rights (online). Oxford Scholarship Online: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Rawls, J. (1996). Political liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Reichert, E. (2006). Understanding human rights: An exercise book. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
  36. Sarup, M. (1993). An introductory guide to post-structuralism and postmodernism (2nd ed.). New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
  37. Sayer, A. (2005). Class, moral worth and recognition. Sociology, 39(5), 947–963. Scholar
  38. Sayer, A. (2011). Why things matter to people: Social science, values and ethical life. The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Shekhtman, A. (2011). Kadi v. Commission: A case study of the development of a rights-based jurisprudence for the European Court of Justice. Claremont-UC Undergraduate Research Conference on the European Union, 2011(9), 89–104. Scholar
  40. Skinner, Q. (2012). So, what does freedom mean to us? Retrieved June 6, 2018, from
  41. Staub-Bernasconi, S. (2014). Transcending disciplinary, professional and national borders in social work education. In C. Noble, H. Strauss, & B. Littlechild (Eds.), Global social work: Crossing borders, blurring boundaries (pp. 27–40). Sydney, New South Wales: Sydney University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tasioulas, J. (2015). On the foundation of human rights. In R. Cruft, M. Liao, & M. Renzo (Eds.), Philosophical foundations of human rights (pp. 1–44). Oxford Scholarship Online: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  43. The British Association of Social Workers. (2012). The code of ethics for social work. Retrieved May 19, 2015, from
  44. Tong, R. (2009). Feminist thought: A more comprehensive introduction (3rd ed.). Colorado: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  45. Tully, J. (2008). Public philosophy as a critical activity. In J. Tully (Ed.), Public philosophy in a new key—Volume 1: Democracy and civic freedom (Vol. 1, pp. 1–38). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Twomey, M. (2015). Why worry about autonomy? Ethics and Social Welfare, 9(3), 1–14. Scholar
  47. United Nations. (2016). United Nations Declaration of Human Rights. Retrieved July 18, 2016, from
  48. Walliman, I. (2014). Transnational social work: A new paradigm with perspectives. In C. Noble, H. Strauss, & B. Littlechild (Eds.), Global social work: Crossing borders, blurring boundaries (pp. 15–26). Sydney, New South Wales: Sydney University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wearing, B. (1996). Gender: The pain and pleasure of difference. Melbourne: Addison Wesley Longman Australia Pty Limited.Google Scholar
  50. Webb, S. A. (2018). European individualism and social work. In F. Kessl, W. Lorenz, H. U. Otto, & S. White (Eds.), European Social Work: A Compendium. Leverkusen, Germany: Verlag Barbara Budrich.Google Scholar
  51. Weiner, A., Lang, A. F. J., Tully, J., Maduro, M. P., & Kumm, M. (2012). Editorial—Global constitutionalism: Human rights, democracy and the rule of law. Global Constitutionalism, 1(1), 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Young, I. M. (1987). Impartiality and the civic public: Some implications of feminist critiques of moral and political theory. In S. Benhabib & D. Cornell (Eds.), Feminism as critique (pp. 57–76). Minneapolis, Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  53. Young, I. M. (1990). Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Arts and HumanitiesEdith Cowan UniversityBunburyAustralia

Personalised recommendations