Takunda Matose
Harvard University, Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics, Edmond J. Safra/Center for Bioethics Joint Fellow-in-Residence
I'm a trained bioethicist working on conceptualizations of justice in healthcare, particularly public health.
less
Related Authors
Interests
Uploads
Papers by Takunda Matose
In this article we argue that developing programs focused on rehabilitation in the setting of mass incarceration is an incoherent goal given that rehabilitation presupposes prior habilitation. Yet, histories of social and personal trauma render this initial habilitation illusive, at best, for much of the population that ends up incarcerated in a setting such as death row. Our claim is that traumatic histories can impede development and lead to antisocial consequences to such an extent that our pursuit of justice within and without carceral systems needs to be habilitative rather than rehabilitative. The unique vision of habilitation that emerges from death row, and the context in which mass incarceration arises in the United States in particular, challenges and strengthens the concept of habilitation. Moreover, a habilitative approach questions the very logic of rehabilitative projects in settings of mass incarceration. We argue that a reinforced vision of habilitation upends the stated objective of "rehabilitation" in mass incarceration settings and gives reason to replace "rehabilitative" projects with "habilitative" projects. We further argue that, in doing so, the very logic of mass incarceration is also turned on its head. In conclusion, we suggest how a habilitative response to individual and social trauma would yield a different kind of justice system that is neither retributive nor restorative but, in fact, deeply habilitative-and transformative.
In this article we argue that developing programs focused on rehabilitation in the setting of mass incarceration is an incoherent goal given that rehabilitation presupposes prior habilitation. Yet, histories of social and personal trauma render this initial habilitation illusive, at best, for much of the population that ends up incarcerated in a setting such as death row. Our claim is that traumatic histories can impede development and lead to antisocial consequences to such an extent that our pursuit of justice within and without carceral systems needs to be habilitative rather than rehabilitative. The unique vision of habilitation that emerges from death row, and the context in which mass incarceration arises in the United States in particular, challenges and strengthens the concept of habilitation. Moreover, a habilitative approach questions the very logic of rehabilitative projects in settings of mass incarceration. We argue that a reinforced vision of habilitation upends the stated objective of "rehabilitation" in mass incarceration settings and gives reason to replace "rehabilitative" projects with "habilitative" projects. We further argue that, in doing so, the very logic of mass incarceration is also turned on its head. In conclusion, we suggest how a habilitative response to individual and social trauma would yield a different kind of justice system that is neither retributive nor restorative but, in fact, deeply habilitative-and transformative.