The social model of disability does not deny that impairment exists (though
I know some have suggested it does). From this I maintain that there is
nothing inherently medical model about a description of impairment (e.g. a
doctor's confirmation of diagnosis, an educational psychologist's
assessment of dyslexia). It is what is done with the information that can
be ascribed to a model of disability.
I would also suggest that we need to have a basic (at least) understanding
of impairments to fully understand disability and that if people see
descriptions of impairments as negative then they are viewing impairments
as negative which in itself is a medical model perspective.
Barry
--On 24 February 2009 20:49 +0000 Amanda Kent <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
> To clarify:
> Emma used the term 'medical professionals' and associated this with
> 'clinical'. It seemed to me there was a risk of conflating
> 'clinical medical, and from personal experience' with 'medical
> model as in cultural theory' – but looks like I also was not too
> clear on that. I think Emma is correct to say that in terms of initial
> eligibility the DSA is medical model, not because of the 'medical
> professional' input but (as you also point out Andy) because of the
> desire for the letter from a 'suitably qualified professional' ie
> the professional does not have to be 'clinical', a word that
> suggests healthcare practice rather than cognitive science or
> educational studies.
> Amanda
>
> On Tue, 24 Feb 2009 09:48:14 -0000, A Velarde <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Amanda. Just to butt in in your very clear perspective. I slightly
>> disagree with you regarding this point. Amanda wrote: "On the DSA: yes,
>> this is predicated on medical model because the student is
>> asked for evidence from a 'suitably qualified professional'.
>> However, the existing DSA Guidance does not define disability and I
>> suggest it would be worth taking a look in detail at what is accepted as
>> evidence of eligibility for
>> DSA (the majority of students seen for DSA assessment have SPLDs and the
>> evidence is not produced by medical professionals)"
>>
>> This may be interpreted as if you are saying that the model may not be
>> 'medical' because non medical evidence is needed to 'diagnose' a
>> disability.
>>
>> Could you elaborate ofn this point. It is my understanding that a
>> medicalised model do both individualise and pathologise a disability.
>> it is hence irrelevant i f those elements are done by a gp, a medical
>> consultand, a councelor, a nuclear physicist or a builder. The model
>> would folow a medicalised approach because it 'profesionalise'
>> knowldege to categorise and patologise impairements.
>>
>> best Andy
>>
Barry Hayward
Disability Coordinator
Student Support Services
Goldsmiths, University of London
New Cross
London
SE14 6NW
T: 020 7717 2292
E: [log in to unmask]
www.goldsmiths.ac.uk
|