Hilde Lindermann#
Hilde Lindemann (born in 1950) is an American philosopher and bioethicist renowned for her work on feminist ethics, narrative ethics, and relational approaches to moral philosophy. She has focused on the intersection of ethics, identity, and social justice, emphasizing how our relationships and social contexts shape moral obligations.
Her works on ethics include:
An Invitation to Feminist Ethics. This collection contains Lindemann’s framing essay on feminist approaches to moral theory.
Holding and Letting Go: The Social Practice of Personal Identities: The book explores the ethical practice of “holding” identities in relationships, and the responsibility to sustain or release them when appropriate.
Relational continuity#
Lindemann argues that the morality of an action depends on whether it sustains the continuity of relationships between people.
Relationships are shaped through lived experiences, such as:
Repeated interactions: Daily routines, caregiving, conversations, and shared challenges that build mutual understanding.
Mutual responsiveness: Attending to one another’s needs, emotions, and reactions.
Negotiation and adaptation: Working through conflicts, compromises, and adjustments to define and fulfill obligations.
Storytelling and reflection: Sharing experiences and reflecting on the past, which codifies understanding and creates shared moral norms.
As relationships evolve, they accumulate a history of interactions. Over time, partners learn patterns of behavior, build trust, and gain insight into each other’s preferences and values. This knowledge forms a foundation of shared understanding and mutual expectations, which together create a relational identity.
Relational continuity refers to the smooth development of the relational identity through stages that are perceived to be coherently connected by all partners. When continuity is preserved, individuals feel recognized, respected, and cared for, and trust grows stronger over time. By contrast, breaking continuity erodes trust and may be experienced as betrayal or abandonment. Continuity can take different forms: it may involve preserving familiar patterns, adapting roles as circumstances shift, or, at times, letting go of the relationship responsibly. What matters morally is that such transitions are managed through recognition and responsiveness.
Preserving relational continuity is a moral act, an expression of respect for one’s partner and a commitment to the shared identity. It is maintained through:
Responsiveness: Attending to the other’s needs, emotions, and cues.
Consistency: Fulfilling expectations reliably and showing up over time.
Recognition: Affirming the other as the same person with whom one shares a history, even amid changing circumstances (e.g., illness).
Adaptation: Adjusting roles and responsibilities as the relationship develops (e.g., an adult child caring for an aging parent).
Communication: Sustaining togetherness through shared stories, affirmations, and dialogue.
Conversely, continuity is broken by:
Neglect: Ignoring the other’s needs.
Betrayal: Violating trust through broken promises or actions that disregard dignity.
Objectification: Reducing the other to a task, burden, or abstract “case” rather than treating them as a partner.
Abrupt withdrawal: Ending contact or failing to honor the shared history.
Disregarding narrative identity: Ignoring the embedded history and treating the relationship as if it had no past.
Dependency and Agency#
Dependency arises when one person relies on another for support, care, or well-being. It is a natural aspect of many relationships, such as those between parents and children, caregivers and patients, or mentors and mentees.
Agency is the capacity to act intentionally, make choices, and influence outcomes. Even when someone is partially dependent, they retain some degree of agency: the ability to express preferences, make decisions, or assert autonomy.
When a relationship involves dependency, it is ethically important to respect both partners’ choices and capacities, even in moments of vulnerability. Moral responsibility lies in balancing two demands: addressing the dependent partner’s needs while also upholding their agency as much as possible. The continuity of the relationship becomes the central ethical measure, with morality judged by how well this balance maintains connection and mutual recognition.
Examples:
Parent–child: The child relies on the parent for care, yet expresses preferences and learns decision-making; the parent responds by guiding without overcontrolling.
Friendship: A friend may rely on support during a crisis but chooses whether to confide or accept help; the other friend respects timing, privacy, and willingness.
Doctor–patient: The patient depends on medical care yet consents to treatment; the doctor ensures safety while respecting informed consent.
Mentorship–mentee: The mentee depends on guidance but decides how to act on advice; the mentor offers feedback while allowing independent judgment.
Romantic partnership: One partner may rely on emotional, practical, or financial support; the other respects boundaries and negotiates compromises to preserve autonomy.
Neighbors: Occasional reliance for assistance is balanced by respecting privacy; help is offered when possible but without overstepping.
From situated experiences to habits#
Every interaction in a relationship, whether routine or extraordinary, contributes to a shared record of experience and forms habits and expectations. Over time, these experiences do:
teach each person what to expect from the other.
establish patterns of response.
form an implicit moral grammar that guides the relationship.
Examples:
Parent–child relationship:
Lived experiences: A parent consistently comforts the child during nightmares, attends school events, and listens to worries.
Expectations: The child expects protection and emotional support, while the parent expects trust, affection, and respect.
Friendship:
Lived experiences: Friends share confidences, celebrate successes, and support one another through hardships.
Expectations: Each friend expects loyalty, reliability, and confidentiality, as well as a balance between giving and receiving support.
Doctor–Patient Relationship:
Lived experiences: Repeated visits in which the doctor listens carefully, respects confidentiality, and explains treatment options clearly.
Expectations: The patient expects trust, privacy, attentive listening, and honest advice, while the doctor expects disclosure of relevant information and cooperation.
Workplace Mentorship:
Lived experiences: A mentor provides constructive feedback, advocates for opportunities, and models professional integrity.
Expectations: The mentee expects guidance, honesty, and reliability; the mentor expects effort, receptiveness, and professionalism.
Romantic Partnership:
Lived experiences: Partners share daily routines, resolve conflicts with care, and affirm one another through affection and support.
Expectations: Partners expect fidelity, emotional availability, and respect, as well as conflict resolution within the framework of loyalty and love.
Neighborly Relationship:
Lived experiences: Neighbors greet each other, help with small tasks (such as collecting mail), and look out for one another’s safety.
Expectations: Neighbors expect civility, fairness, and occasional helpfulness, along with respect for boundaries and property.
Universal rules#
Lindemann argues that ethics is grounded in preserving the continuity of relationships through lived experiences, rather than in the application of abstract rules. However, rule are not irrelevant, they are useful when understood in the context of the relationship. Their value lies in how they support, clarify, or safeguard continuity.
Why rules remain useful:
Providing a framework for reflection: Relationships are complex, emotional, and often unpredictable. In difficult moments, abstract principles (such as respect autonomy) can provide orientation when relational instincts feel unclear.
Guarding against blind spots: Embedded histories can foster bias or neglect. Rules remind us of broader ethical standards that counteract harmful relational patterns.
Offering shared language: Rules supply a common vocabulary for discussing relational tensions and for articulating why certain actions threaten continuity.
Structuring institutions that support continuity: Many relationships, doctor–patient, teacher–student, mentor–mentee, are embedded in institutions. Ethical codes formalize expectations.
Acting as safeguards under stress: When emotions run high, people may act impulsively in ways that damage relationships. Rules provide guardrails that protect continuity in fragile moments.
Preventing unjust termination: Rules establish minimum obligations that must be honored before a relationship can end or be redefined.
Illustrative examples:
Respect for autonomy: A teenager seeks more independence, but the parent continues to treat them as a small child. Invoking autonomy, the parent reflects: “My child has the right to make some decisions.” This shift from control to guidance preserves care while allowing the relationship to evolve into a more balanced family relationship.
Fairness and reciprocity: One friend dominates conversations, leaving the other feeling unheard. The overlooked friend appeals to fairness: “Our friendship should be mutual, not just about you.” The principle articulates the imbalance and opens space for repair.
Informed consent: A doctor dismisses a patient’s preferences, assuming they “know best.” The rule of informed consent requires the doctor to involve the patient in decisions.
Professional responsibility: A mentor frequently cancels meetings, leaving the mentee unsupported. The mentee invokes professional standards, reminding the mentor that guidance is part of their role.
Respect for boundaries: One partner feels smothered by constant demands for attention, while the other feels neglected when space is requested. Clarifying boundaries and expectations improves the relationship through healthier mutual respect.
Respect for rights: A neighbor repeatedly blocks another’s driveway, insisting it is “just temporary.” The affected neighbor appeals to fairness and property rights, framing the issue as one of mutual respect.
Virtues#
The virtues can be regarded as moral because they nurture and contribute to the preservation of relational continuity
Humility: Allows one to acknowledge limitations and mistakes, making space for forgiveness and repair. Prevents domination or arrogance, which could fracture mutual recognition. Strengthens adaptability by prioritizing the relationship over ego.
Kindness: Nurtures trust through everyday acts of care and attentiveness. Reinforces responsiveness, showing the other they are valued and seen. Softens conflicts, enabling smoother adaptation during challenges.
Patience: Provides stability during times of frustration, change, or slow growth in the relationship. Allows for repeated interactions to unfold without haste or resentment. Sustains consistency and resilience in the face of difficulties.
Diligence: Demonstrates commitment by showing up reliably and fulfilling responsibilities. Upholds consistency, which is central to preserving trust and shared identity. Ensures responsiveness does not fade over time due to neglect or complacency.
Charity: Grounds the relationship in self-giving concern for the other’s good. Motivates adaptation for the sake of the shared relationship. Enriches storytelling and reflection, creating a history of generosity and shared meaning.
Temperance: Regulates impulses that could disrupt trust. Protects continuity by preventing behaviors that might fracture respect or recognition. Enables balanced negotiation and compromise.
Chastity: Honors the dignity of the other, ensuring they are never objectified. Preserves continuity by safeguarding trust in contexts of intimacy and fidelity. Encourages responsible adaptation of relational roles without betrayal.
Inclusion#
Inclusion refers to practices and attitudes that ensure individuals and groups are recognized, respected, and allowed to participate fully in social, institutional, and relational life. It is the opposite of exclusion, which marginalizes or silences people by denying them recognition, opportunities, or belonging.
Inclusion involves:
Recognition: seeing someone as a full moral agent with a voice and identity.
Participation: ensuring that their perspectives and needs are taken into account in decisions and practices.
Equity: providing fair conditions so that differences (e.g., disability, gender, culture) do not lead to disadvantage or marginalization.
Relational continuity does not exist in isolation; it is always embedded within broader social contexts. In this sense, inclusion is critical because the ability of partners to sustain relational continuity can be influenced by external actors. When external actors, such as institutions, social groups, or authorities, deny inclusion, they create pressures that the partners must navigate. The partners are now required to respond to expectations that may conflict with the internal patterns, history, and continuity of their relationships.
Therefore, inclusion is a moral act because it enables the active preservation of relational continuity, allowing partners to hold one another’s identities with care and responsiveness.
Examples of inclusion:
Grandparent–grandchild: A community center provides translation services so a grandparent who speaks a different language can attend a grandchild’s school play. The grandparent–grandchild relationship is included and reinforced through the shared experience.
Caregivers: hospital has a patient recovering from surgery whose primary caregiver is their adult child. Instead of limiting medical updates to “spouses only,” the hospital recognizes the adult child as the key caregiver and includes them in medical consultations and care planning.
Examples of exclusion:
Romantic partnership: During a hospital stay, only “immediate family” is permitted visitation, excluding a long-term unmarried partner. The exclusion undermines the couple’s shared history and care practices, forcing the included partner to choose between honoring the relationship and complying with institutional norms.
Workplace exclusion: An employee is repeatedly left out of after-work gatherings due to assumptions about their lifestyle. Informal bonds with colleagues fail to develop, damaging the trust and mutual recognition necessary for professional collaboration.
Lindermann moral guidelines#
For those seeking to apply Lindermann ethics, this list provides practical guidelines for putting Lindermanns’s principles into practice.
Prioritize relationships: Schedule regular time to connect with family, friends, and community. Make decisions with the impact on your relationships in mind. Check in with people affected by your choices and ask how they feel.
Understand context: Gather background information before making moral or professional decisions. Consider cultural norms, social pressures, and personal circumstances. Avoid one-size-fits-all solutions; tailor actions to the specific situation.
Honor personal identity: Respect others’ self-descriptions, pronouns, and chosen lifestyles. Support people in expressing themselves authentically. Reflect on how your own identity affects your ethical judgments.
Listen to narratives: Encourage people to share their stories before judging or acting. Practice active listening: focus fully, avoid interrupting, and summarize understanding. Use narratives to understand motivations, challenges, and moral implications.
Care and empathy: Ask yourself: “What would it feel like to be in their position?” Offer support through acts of kindness, attention, or advocacy. Make care a deliberate part of daily routines, not just emergencies.
Challenge abstraction: Apply ethical principles to real situations rather than treating them as rigid rules. Consider concrete outcomes and practical consequences of decisions. Use case studies or personal experiences to test moral reasoning.
Recognize social power dynamics: Identify who holds power in situations and how it affects fairness. Advocate for marginalized voices in conversations, policies, or workplaces. Reflect on how your own position may influence ethical choices.
Engage in mutual responsibility: Collaborate on decisions that affect shared spaces or communities. Take accountability for mistakes and repair relationships when harmed. Encourage dialogue about shared obligations and collective goals.
Foster inclusion: Invite diverse perspectives and genuinely consider them in decision-making. Challenge exclusionary practices in your environment. Support initiatives that amplify underrepresented voices.
Balance holding and letting go: Offer guidance or support without imposing control. Recognize when to step back to allow autonomy and growth. Reflect on when intervention is helpful versus overbearing.