La función Notarial dentro de los asuntos de Jurisdicción Voluntaria

According to Armstrong, Armstrong and Spandagou (2010:24), inclusive education originates from the idea of a “just and fair society” in contrast to discriminatory educational systems. Scholars such as Tirussew (2005:112) and Asrat (2013:59) also strongly argue that the notion of inclusive education evolves from human rights and social justice. As a result, the notion of inclusive education is widely supported by international human rights declarations such as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989), the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2006). Hence, this research is framed within the theory of justice. Many theories of justice have evolved. John Rawls is one of the theorists who developed the Theory of Justice in 1971. Arneson (2008:1) says that Rawls’ aim was to create a theory of justice that was better than utilitarianism and that could reverse the idea of the ‘No Theory Theory’. Arneson (2008:2) further says that Rawls developed the justice theory as a reaction against utilitarianism for its misrepresentation of different people with different backgrounds or for a non-critical consideration of the differences which are found between/among persons. Another critique, the National Pro Bono Resource Centre (2011:6) concludes that utilitarianism promoted an unequal distribution of resources among societies. Utilitarianism disregarded the rights of disadvantaged people. It gave more rights to upper-class people at the cost of the lower-class society.

Furthermore, Arneson (2008:5-6), Terzi (2010:10), National Pro Bono Resource Centre (2011:7) and Hey and Beyers (2011:238) posit that Rawls’ theory of justice entails two principles. They are liberty (freedom) and social equality. While the first principle supports the right to freedom that every citizen or individual should have, the second principle advocates that social and economic discrepancies should be avoided in order to include the disadvantaged and share resources equally. According to this theory of justice, persons with any kind of impairment, including visually-impaired persons, can enjoy their freedom and benefit from social and economic aspects. In other words, Rawls’ theory of justice is the foundation for the pursuit of social justice by which disadvantaged persons can benefit from social services such as education. Nevertheless, Terzi (2010:10) stresses that Rawls’ theory of justice does not directly focus on education but his theory is open to extend to further developments such as the inequality in education.

Although Rawls’ concept of social justice is found to be prominent, it was also criticised. The National Pro Bono Resource Centre (2011:6) criticised it for giving emphasis to government structures or systematic forms that are implemented not to benefit individuals but to benefit society in a general way. As a result, the National Pro Bono Resource Centre (2011:7) looked into the work of other scholars such as Miller and Sen. Miller’s view of social justice gives more attention to unequal distribution of resources to the society. Sen’s view of social justice gives emphasis to personal capacities to do things and also emphasises inclusivity of every individual (The National Pro Bono Resource Centre, 2011:8). The above discussion shows the different views of Western scholars on social justice but what does social justice really mean? Although scholars define social justice in different ways, they agree on the idea that social justice is about fairness, equality, freedom and/or democracy (Eugene, Provenzo & Provenzo, 2008:730; Hey & Beyers 2011:234; Humpage & Fleras, 2001:39; Jost & Kay, 2010:1122; Kridel, 2010:792). Regarding its derivation, Eugene et al., (2008:729) say the idea of the term justice originates from the Greek “just” which means “fair” and the idea of “just society” which is a model framework for the development of the society.

According to Eugene et al. (2008:729), the concept of social justice has become a vital necessity in the field of education. By giving examples of the relationship between a learner and economic status, the writers articulate that high-achieving

learners have a better chance of acceptance, status and social inclusion in their community. Thus, they underline the value of social justice in the education of citizens. Again, Eugene et al., (2008:729) state that the background differences of the children have motivated scholars to study how to alleviate inequalities. These two points leads to the idea that scholars have understood the inequality that disadvantaged learners are exposed to and the importance of education to minimise marginalisation. In addition, it is possible to say that learners with diverse backgrounds such as visually-impaired learners can benefit from educational provision when the learning environment is set up in a way that diverse learner groups can get a ‘just’ education.

In addition, Humpage and Fleras (2001:39) as well as Hey and Beyers (2011:238- 239) tabled three models of social justice. The first one is the distributive model of social justice: the idea behind this is that resources (scarce) are distributed equally to individuals. The second model of social justice is the retributive model. Hey and Beyers (2011:238) say that retributive model is about punishing or rewarding people based on their performance. The retributive model of social justice is also known as “market-individualism”. Again, Humpage and Fleras (2001:40) state that this type of model also deals with giving reimburse to individuals who were unfairly treated in the past. The last one is the re-cognitive model of social justice. This model of social justice seems to appreciate diversity which corresponds with inclusion. In describing the re-cognitive model of social justice, Humpage and Fleras (2001:41, citing Gale, 2000) articulate that it is different from distributive and retributive justice for the reason that re-cognitive model of social justice “...take differences seriously, recognition of the collective rights of groups, support for indigenous models of self- determination, and commitment to inclusiveness through meaningful involvement in decision-making processes”. Hence, this model of justice seems to fit the concept of inclusion because of its closeness to it and can shape the present discussion of the inclusion of visual impairment in this research.

To sum up, studies of the last three decades show that disability is not a health problem; rather it is a civil rights and social problem. Hence, social change is needed in order to avoid discrimination. Additionally, studies in the area of disability have ascertained that disability is not as what it was considered to be by health and bioethics people (Asch, 2001:318-319). Therefore, visual impairment should be

viewed from a social justice perspective than medical one. Otherwise, the inclusion of visually-impaired learners in schools will not be inclusion but would amount to special needs education.

2.3 THE NATURE OF SCHOOL INCLUSIVITY FOR THE VISUALLY-IMPAIRED