Challenging the role of resilience and vulnerability in narratives of well-being

<ns3:p>During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was significant emphasis on building resilience to address the vulnerability felt at both individual and collective levels. This focus on resilience was critiqued by scholars who saw the discourse as stemming from neoliberal governance. In this paper, we critique the political roots of neoliberalism, particularly the ideal liberal state citizen, the autonomous individual who views reliance on others as vulnerability. We use the concept of relational autonomy, which has influenced fields like bioethics and health studies, to explore how vulnerability relates to interpersonal, social, and political dimensions of autonomy. We propose a typology where vulnerability can emerge as positive or self-affirming, or negative, as self-undermining, circumstantial, and/or pathogenic. The latter forms require significant political engagement to address the conditions that foster it. We apply this typology to two related case studies: Australia’s National Mental Health and Wellbeing Pandemic Response Plan and the Victorian State Government’s lockdown of public housing towers in inner Melbourne. These case studies reveal how vulnerability can be used as a tool of governmental control within resilience discourse, risking circumstantial and pathogenic vulnerability due to state securitization of protection. We conclude by proposing a reframing of vulnerability within a relational autonomy framework of well-being, emphasizing care for interpersonal relationships and care as a public practice to enhance democratic participation in pursuing health and social good.</ns3:p>