Hiya all
The social model is a stance, an epistemology, a position from which we can
devise social theories of disability and impairment. It is not somethign to
moved beyond, but from and and with. It should be noted that the social model
is particularly important in relation to the politicisation of disabled people
- at the very least in Britain. Therefore, the social model allows a common
space from which to develop politicised actions and enabling theories. While
researchers and activists outside of Britain may feel that this model is
reactionary, in britain it has been instrumental in promoting political
activism and accompanying social theory - or, as Marx would put it, praxis.
There are many writers who have engaged with the social model and developed many
important and exciting ideas in relation to social theories of impairment (e.g.
Abberley, Scott-Hill, Tremain, Hughes and Paterson, Titchkosky), while theories
of disability I think have never been stronger. I cannot accept that impairment
has been sidelined by the social model. Maybe some social theories have
marginalised impairment - or understanably focus on, say, disabling structures
rather than impairment - but other social theories have embraced impairment.
Most importantly, organisations of disabled people have always had critical
things to say about impairment as well as disability - this is not simply an
academic debate.
food for thought
regards
Dan Goodley
Quoting "Simon Stevens (CEO, Enable)" <[log in to unmask]>:
> Sara,
>
> I agree about moving beyond the social model, it is a limited model which
> denies impairment cultural and concepts of pains for a start. However, what
> I am hearing is not a desire on move on but rather a hostile attack on the
> social model and anyone to accepts the notion of the social model or the
> reality of impairment as primitive oppressors!
>
> Until people are willing to accept for some people at some stages impairment
> exists and has a valid purpose, I stand my ground.
>
> Simon S
> --
> Simon Stevens
> Chief Executive, Enable Enterprises
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: The Disability-Research Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Sara Ryan
> Sent: 02 September 2004 11:29
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: impairment
>
> 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.
>
> ________________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.
>
--
Dr Dan Goodley
Reader Applied Disability Studies
Inclusive Education and Equality Research Centre
University of Sheffield
School of Education
388 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2JA
Tel: +44 (0)114 222 8125
Fax: +44 (0)114 279 6236
**NEW RESEARCH PROJECT**
Parents, Professionals and Disabled Babies: Identifying
Enabling Care
http://www.shef.ac.uk/inclusive-education/disabledbabies/
________________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.
|