A hard case for the ethics of supported voting: Cognitive and communicative disabilities, and incommunicability

Abstract In this article, I explore the implications of three moral grounds for justification supported voting – respect as opacity, equal status, and political care. For each ground, ask whether it justifies surrogate voters unable to either communicate or give effect their electoral judgments, due some cognitive communicative disability. (Henceforth: incommunicability cases.) argue that opacity does not permit voting, status justify such support although latter account can make sense value loss involved in persistent non-participation individuals with disabilities. Finally, an based on ethics care accommodate a pro tanto permission provide form cases, inclusive approach UN Convention Rights Persons Disabilities decision-making. However, show what community individual caretakers ultimately owe adult fellow citizens members is adequate but necessarily voting.