 |
 |
Hi Jimmy, Thanks for your response, which I am thinking about...My initial thoughts are that I can see your point absolutely, although I think that the problem with the social model lies exactly in the area under discussion. What about, for instance, a facial disfigurement which is neither an impairment to physical function (i.e. movement, eating or whatever), nor within the "normal" range of facial characteristics (maybe the result of an accident)? Can a distinction be drawn between:an impairment which impairs only superficially, which nontheless is disabling through attitudes, or through an individual's body image; a physically disabling impairment which is where Jimmy and I disagree (and which implies that it is the impairment which disables rather than society); and a "stigmatised body image", which implies that the person who is stigmatised has a body image congruent with the view of society towards that body. I don't have any answers here. Lynne %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%