title: Rehabilitation: disability ethics versus Peter Singer.
abstract: This commentary discusses utilitarian bioethics currently articulated by Peter Singer, one of the most widely known bioethicists of the 21st century. His controversial concepts of personhood and replaceability have important implications for people with disabilities, caregivers, and rehabilitation in general. Singer suggests that people with severe disabilities should not be considered persons and therefore have no rights or status in ethical issues. In addition, he argues that, although some people with less severe disabilities qualify as persons, their potential quality of life is significantly compromised by disability and therefore it may be ethically desirable to eliminate them so that their resources can be used for someone with superior potential. We reject these ideas, and suggest that those involved in rehabilitation carefully consider these ideas because they imply that rehabilitation is an immoral act unless it results in full and typical function.
authors.affiliation: Canadian Centre for Social Entrepreneurship, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
authors.forename: Gary W
authors.initials: GW
authors.lastname: McPherson
authors.forename: Dick
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Sobsey
mesh_terms: D026688:Bioethical Issues; D006233:Persons with Disabilities / Q000534:rehabilitation*; D034462:Dissent and Disputes; D028663:Ethical Theory; D026822:Ethicists / Q000523:psychology*; D049673:History, 20th Century; D006801:Humans; D011788:Quality of Life; D012046:Rehabilitation / Q000941:ethics*