Hi Simon,
(Sorry for butting in again Larry!)
Isn't the point to move beyond the social model rather than abolish it?
There seems to be a fixation upon the social model in the UK which is
counter-productive and almost reactionary.
Why can't we discuss ideas/experiences about
disability/impairment/difference without always having to OPENLY
incorporate 'the social model' in some way? Without encouraging a load of
emails pointing out the importance of the social model, what I mean is
surely it goes without saying? I thought theoretical ideas and
developments become incorporated within movements and form the foundation
upon which news ideas and perspectives are developed.
Sara
> Larry,
>
> I can understand your point but can you understand one?
>
> I use the term impairment to mean condition or status, I am difference, I
> do
> have difficulties which require assistance.
>
> Like or not, impairment and disability exist and are bargaining tools in
> receiving assistance, services and in my case, work. I use my impairment
> and
> too right, I have to.
>
> If the social model is not working for you, fine, but sort it out in your
> own space. My concern are been a desire to abolished the social model and
> impairment for everyone just because it is not working for a few people,
> and
> please believe me when I say a few... this battle is not on the streets.
>
> The reality of life is far more complex than the perspectives I hear here
> and the reality is impairment exists and the term must be used as a tool.
>
> By wishing away impairment now will also make life worst for disabled
> people
> as the abuses their suffer will be valided as 'differences' since the new
> medical model understanding of difference will prevail without an social
> model and rights models to defend disabled people. So while those some
> impairments will feel happier at 'being accepted', other impairments will
> suffer increased abuses of their human rights in the name of difference.
>
> Simon
>
> --
> Simon Stevens
> Chief Executive, Enable Enterprises
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: The Disability-Research Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Larry Arnold
> Sent: 01 September 2004 23:02
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: impairment
>
> In my construction as soon as you refer to my "impairment" you are
> disabling
> me, can you not understand that because you are specifying some part of my
> condition, that is less than what it should be, you are by calling me
> impaired, measuring me against a standard of what is not impaired
> therefore
> constructing both my impairment and disability
>
> Disability as socially constructed does not arise from impairment because
> it
> is a quality that can be ascribed to a person purely by adverse judgement,
> guilt by association as it were. If one is genetically vulnerable to
> certain
> conditions, one might not per se be impaired but one will still be
> disabled
> if one cannot get insurance.
>
>
> Larry
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: The Disability-Research Discussion List
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Mark Priestley
>> Sent: 01 September 2004 17:20
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: impairment
>>
>>
>> I suppose what I mean is that having differing views about the
>> ontological nature of impairment is not necessarily inconsistent
>> with making good use of a social model of disability (rather than
>> a social model of impairment) since, in a social model view,
>> there is no necessary causal connection between impairment and
>> disability - i.e. if social model research is about disability
>> then it probably won't engage much with the nature of impairment,
>> instead focusing on the identification and removal of disabling
>> barriers and relationships.
>>
>> Assuming that... 'Disability is something imposed on top of our
>> impairments by the way we are unnecessarily excluded from full
>> participation in society...' (UPIAS)
>>
>> ... then the challenge for most people seems to be arguing about
>> what they believe is 'necessary' and 'unnecessary' exclusion from
>> full participation - rather than what impairment is (I guess
>> Simon is saying these two arguments are connected here). Carol
>> Thomas' distinction between disability and impairment effects
>> (social and individual properties) is one stab at that
>> distinction I guess (there are others).
>>
>> Only a personal view of course.
>>
>> Best wishes
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: The Disability-Research Discussion List
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Shelley Tremain
>> Sent: 01 September 2004 18:39
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: impairment
>>
>> This is of course a tendentious misconstrual of the (hegemonic) social
>> model.
>>
>> That version of the model holds that there is a strict division of
>> impairment and disability. As the saying goes, "disability is not a
>> necessary consequence of impairment" (a view which you reiterate in your
>> latest book). However, if, as you state below, " impairment is itself a
>> social construct" and as you further state
>>
>> "The definition and labelling of impairment is critical to the process
>> of
>> disablement - a long standing technique of surveillance or governance
>> that
>> has a real impact on people's lives (e.g. influencing decisions
>> about which
>> schools people attend, where they live, if and where they are employed,
>> whether they can be parents, whether they should live or die, etc.)."
>>
>> the distinction between impairment and disability breaks down.
>>
>> The UPIAS document from which the social model apparently emerged makes
>> a
>> definite nature/culture distinction. This is an ontological
>> assumption. In
>> a post in April, you indicated that you agreed with the ontological
>> assumptions of the UPIAS document (it may be that you have reconsidered
>> your/their view or maybe you simply aren't familiar enough with that
>> philosophical terminology). Regardless, in your remarks below,
>> you collapse
>> this distinction. I'm afraid that in neither case can you have it both
>> ways.
>>
>> I would think for your students' sake (if not for the sake of
>> others on this
>> list) you would try to be more consistent in your stated views.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> ______________________
>> Professor Shelley Tremain
>> Department of Philosophy
>> University of Toronto at Mississauga
>> Erindale College
>> Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
>> L5L 1C6
>>
>> [log in to unmask]
>> [log in to unmask]
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Mark Priestley" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2004 4:39 AM
>> Subject: impairment
>>
>>
>> mmm... it's a well trodden debate but my own view, for what it's worth,
>> is
>> that it's more helpful to think about social model analysis as a tool to
>> expose the oppression experienced by people with 'perceived
>> impairments' or
>> people 'labelled as having impairments' (since impairment is
>> itself a social
>> construct). The definition and labelling of impairment is critical to
>> the
>> process of disablement - a long standing technique of surveillance or
>> governance that has a real impact on people's lives (e.g. influencing
>> decisions about which schools people attend, where they live, if and
>> where
>> they are employed, whether they can be parents, whether they
>> should live or
>> die, etc.).
>>
>> In a social world constructed and governed around shifting expectations
>> of
>> normality those impairment labels change over time and in response to
>> changes in the social relations of production and reproduction (hence
>> disability changes too). From a social model perspective it would be the
>> construction and regulation of human normality and social norms that
>> gives
>> rise to disabling barriers (e.g. norms developed in response to the
>> emergence of capitalism, industrialization, modernity, cultural
>> imperialism,
>> nationalism, eugenics, medicalisation, etc.).
>>
>> Understanding how this kind of labelling takes place, the assumptions on
>> which it is based, and the impact it then has on people's lives
>> seems pretty
>> consistent with social model analysis as far as I can see. I
>> don't think it
>> necessarily requires a belief that anyone actually 'has an impairment',
>> whatever that is (!), as an individual property (e.g. Carol
>> Thomas' book?).
>> Sara is right about learning differences for example. From a social
>> model
>> perspective, understanding why some but not others are labeled as
>> impairments (learning difficulties) exposes how institutions of
>> learning and
>> teaching fail to accommodate some differences.
>>
>> To take Sara's and Simon's points, the research literature on learning
>> difficulties' seems to have taken this on board more thoroughly than
>> other
>> fields by often talking explicitly about 'people labelled as
>> having learning
>> difficulties' rather than 'people with learning difficulties' (a
>> construction that has evolved radically over recent years to include
>> many
>> new labels and many new groups of people).
>>
>> PS. I found Hughes and Paterson's paper on the 'disappearing body' quite
>> helpful in highlighting the risk of 'abandoning the body to
>> medical science'
>> by accepting fixed biophysical notions of impairment.
>>
>> Best wishes
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: The Disability-Research Discussion List
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Larry Arnold
>> Sent: 31 August 2004 23:04
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: New Book
>>
>> Except of course that your version of the social model still
>> discriminates
>> because it contains the concept of impairment, which is a personal and
>> as
>> negative as any "word" and anglo centric linguistically.
>>
>> Oh well whats the point of trying to change and challenge peoples
>> beliefs as
>> they hang onto them anyway, Ossification would be a good word for
>> it? if it
>> weren't so latinate in construction.
>>
>> I leave you word people to it, you can't see beyond your personal
>> constructs
>> because you can't think beyond your language into anothers mind who
>> thinks
>> differently.
>>
>> Larry
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: The Disability-Research Discussion List
>> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Colin Barnes
>> > Sent: 31 August 2004 07:39
>> > To: [log in to unmask]
>> > Subject: New Book
>> >
>> >
>> > Dear All
>> >
>> > I hope the following will be of nterest. It is the second in a
>> > series of three books documenting contributions to seminars held
>> > across the UK last year.
>> >
>> > Colin Barnes
>> >
>> > ญญญญญญญญญญ--------------------------------------------------------
>> > -----------------------------
>> >
>> > Disability Policy and Practice:
>> > Applying the Social Model
>> >
>> > Edited by Colin Barnes and Geof Mercer
>> >
>> >
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: The Disability-Research Discussion List
>> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Colin Barnes
>> > Sent: 31 August 2004 07:39
>> > To: [log in to unmask]
>> > Subject: New Book
>> >
>> >
>> > Dear All
>> >
>> > I hope the following will be of nterest. It is the second in a
>> > series of three books documenting contributions to seminars held
>> > across the UK last year.
>> >
>> > Colin Barnes
>> >
>> > ญญญญญญญญญญ--------------------------------------------------------
>> > -----------------------------
>> >
>> > Disability Policy and Practice:
>> > Applying the Social Model
>> >
>> > Edited by Colin Barnes and Geof Mercer
>> >
>> >
>> > 'Disability Policy and Practice: Applying the Social Model of
>> > Disability' contains thirteen chapters on the application of
>> > social model inspired thinking on social policy in Britain. The
>> > contributors include established figures and newcomers to the
>> > field. They raise a range of important issues and concerns
>> > central to theorising and researching disability policy and
>> > practice spanning employment, housing, higher education with
>> > examples from England, Scotland, and Wales, social 'care',
>> > independent living and leisure and social relations. Together
>> > they provide ample evidence of the continuing relevance of
>> > debates emanating from the social model of disability within
>> > disability studies and related disciplines. This book will be of
>> > particular interest to academics, researchers, professionals,
>> > disabled people and lay audiences with an interest in disability
>> > issues and the on going struggle for a more equitable and just
>> society.
>> >
>> > Disability Policy and Practice: Applying the Social Model' is
>> > also available on request at no additional cost on CD, in PDF
>> > format, for ease of access for people who require alternative formats.
>> >
>> > The Book and CD are only available by mail order from the
>> >
>> > Centre for Disability Studies,
>> > School of Sociology and Social Policy,
>> > University of Leeds,
>> > LS2 9JT
>> >
>> > at: ฃ16.50 including postage and packing (20% discount for orders
>> > of four or more)
>> >
>> > Payment may be by credit card (Visa or Mastercard) via the
>> > telephone, fax, email, or by cheque, payable to the University of
>> > Leeds. To order contact Marie Ross on (44) 113 3434407 (tel. and
>> > minicom), or (44) 113 3434415 (fax) by email:
>> > [log in to unmask] or by post at the address above.
>> >
>> > ________________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.
>> >
>>
>> ________________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.
>>
>> ________________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.
>>
>> ________________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.
>>
>> ________________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.
>
> ________________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.
>
> ________________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.
>
________________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.
|