Carol Gilligan has delineated two ethics, the ethic of rights and the ethic of care. In this article I argue that the two ethics are part of one overall system, the ethic of care functioning as a necessary base for the ethic of rights. I also argue that the system is seriously flawed. Because women are held accountable to both ethics and because the two ethics frequently conflict, women recurrently find themselves in a moral double bind.

Blue collar women in declining industries tend to suffer permanent job loss as a result of dislocation, and women living in rural areas may be particularly vulnerable to extended unemployment. Relatively little is known about their experiences, in part because existing conceptual models do not adequately represent women's perspectives. In this study it is proposed that an ethic of care, as conceptualized by Carol Gilligan, shapes women's interpretations of the meaning of job dislocation. Gilligan's constructs are applied to a study (...) of middle aged women who were dislocated when an apparel manufacturing plant in their rural Southern community closed unexpectedly. The focus is on three moral dilemmas and the opportunities for growth that occurred as a result of the crisis, as women reconstructed the meaning of the experience. The potential contributions of the ethic of care perspective to other studies of job loss is discussed. (shrink)