Hi
In response to discussion about Michael's question, isn't there a bit of a
misunderstanding here. Personally, I wouldn't suggest that all research
outside a 'social model' was wrong. However, the social interpretation of
disability (which, in my opinion, might include different variations of what
a social model is) has been enormously powerful in raising questions and
prompting political action towards a more inclusive society.
I think the important point is to distinguish between those questions which
are most appropriately addressed within a social interpretation of
disability from those more appropriately addressed within a medical
interpretation. There are lots of questions that are better addressed
through a medical model I'm sure (although I'm not really qualified to know
what they might be). Just as I would prefer sociologists not to perform
neuro-surgery, I would also not wish to see a neuro surgeon determine
research and debate about social issues like equality and discrimination.
Horses for courses I suppose.
The problem with the medical interpretation of disability is when it is
applied inappropriately to social issues (I'm sure the converse is also
true). I don't know anyone who claims that their version of the social model
explains all research questions affecting disabled people, but rather that
it focusses on those aspects of our social world that can be changed
(through the identification and removal of disabling barriers). I don't
think there is any necessary epistemological conflict here. It's just that,
historically, this discussion list was established as a space where people
who worked within a broadly social model approach could share and discuss
research issues. There are plenty of spaces for discussion amongst more
medically oriented researchers (many of whom I'm sure are very good at what
they do).
The kind of debates we have here are mostly very useful and we ought to
welcome a broad church of opinion and discussion about the paradigms we use.
On reflection, I'm not sure that I know anyone who uses 'the social model'
as dogmatically as might be suggested in our conversations (although I've
seen other kinds of dogma expressed). Maybe there is a kind of straw doll
argument going on here, where we set up an ideal type of what a social model
is supposed to look like and then knock it down because it is too
restrictive? Just a thought.
Best Wishes
Mark Priestley
Centre for Disability Studies
University of Leeds
LEEDS
LS2 9JT
UK
tel: +44 113 233 4417
fax: +44 113 233 4415
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies
________________End of message______________________
Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List
are now located at:
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
|