Editing Social model of disability

{{Short description|Societal failure to adapt to disabilities}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=November 2020}}
[[File:Let's Raise the Roof - A Social Model of Disability - a Welsh Government video - 2021.webm|thumb|A short government advisory animation on the social model of disability]]
{{Disability|theory}}
{{Discrimination sidebar|Related}}
The '''social model of disability''' identifies systemic barriers, derogatory attitudes, and [[social exclusion]] (intentional or inadvertent), which make it difficult or impossible for disabled people to attain their valued [[Capability approach#Key terms|functionings]]. The social model of disability diverges from the dominant [[medical model of disability]], which is a functional analysis of the body as a machine to be fixed in order to conform with normative conceptions of [[quality of life]].<ref>{{cite journal|last=Paley|first=John|title=The Cartesian melodrama in nursing|journal=Nursing Philosophy|date=1 October 2002|volume=3|issue=3|pages=189–192|doi=10.1046/j.1466-769X.2002.00113.x}}</ref> The medical model of disability carries with it a negative connotation, with negative labels associated with disabled people.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Barton |first=Len |title=Disability and Society |publisher=Routledge |year=1996 |isbn=9781315841984 |edition=1st |location=London, United Kingdom |pages=3–17}}</ref> The social model of disability seeks to challenge power imbalances within society between differently-abled people and seeks to redefine what disability means as a diverse expression of human life.<ref name=":3">{{Cite journal |last=Lid |first=Inger Marie |date=June 2014 |title=Universal Design and disability: an interdisciplinary perspective |journal=Disability and Rehabilitation |volume=36 |issue=16 |pages=1344–1349 |doi=10.3109/09638288.2014.931472 |pmid=24954388 |via=Taylor & Francis}}</ref> While [[Physiology|physical]], sensory, intellectual, or [[psychological]] variations may result in individual functional differences, these do not necessarily have to lead to [[disability]] unless society fails to take account of and include people intentionally with respect to their individual needs. The origin of the approach can be traced to the 1960s, and the specific term emerged from the United Kingdom in the 1980s.

The social model of disability is based on a distinction between the terms ''impairment'' and ''disability''. In this model, the word ''impairment'' is used to refer to the actual attributes (or lack of attributes) that affect a person, such as the inability to walk or breathe independently. It seeks to redefine ''disability'' to refer to the restrictions caused by society when it does not give equitable social and structural support according to disabled peoples' structural needs.<ref>{{cite web |author1=Pam Thomas |author2=Lorraine Gradwell |author3=Natalie Markham |title=Defining Impairment within the Social Model of Disability |url=https://disability-studies.leeds.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/40/library/thomas-pam-Defining-Impairment-within-the-Social-Model-of-Disability.pdf |access-date=2012-11-10 |work=GMCDP's Coalition Magazine |date=July 1997 |publisher=Centre for Disability Studies |archive-date=7 March 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220307222646/https://disability-studies.leeds.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/40/library/thomas-pam-Defining-Impairment-within-the-Social-Model-of-Disability.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> As a simple example, if a person is unable to climb stairs, the medical model focuses on making the individual physically able to climb stairs. The social model tries to make stair-climbing unnecessary, such as by making society adapt to their needs, and assist them by replacing the stairs with a wheelchair-accessible ramp.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Social model of disability |url=https://www.scope.org.uk/about-us/social-model-of-disability/ |access-date=2022-07-31 |website= Scope UK |language=en-gb |archive-date=31 July 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220731003748/https://www.scope.org.uk/about-us/social-model-of-disability/ |url-status=live }}</ref> According to the social model, the person remains disabled with respect to climbing stairs, but the disability is negligible and no longer disabling in that scenario, because the person can get to the same locations without climbing any stairs.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Winter |first=Jerry Allan |date=2003 |title=The Development of the Disability Rights Movement as a Social Problem Solver |url=https://dsq-sds.org/article/view/399 |s2cid-access=free |journal=Disability Studies Quarterly |volume=23 |issue=1 |doi=10.18061/dsq.v23i1.399 |s2cid=142986957 |access-date=31 July 2022 |archive-date=15 June 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220615130035/http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/399 |url-status=live |doi-access=free }}</ref>

It celebrates a non-conformist approach to the concept of disability and confronts deficit thinking of disability, which is argued to sit alongside the lines of activism and identity of pride for individuals with disabilities.<ref name=":1" />

==History==

=== Disability rights movement ===
There is a hint from before the 1970s that the interaction between disability and society was beginning to be considered. British politician and disability rights campaigner [[Alf Morris]] wrote in 1969 (emphasis added):<ref>{{Cite book |first1=Alfred |last1=Morris |first2=Arthur |last2=Butler |title=No Feet to Drag - Report on the Disabled |publisher=Sidgwick & Jackson |year=1972 |isbn=978-0-283-97867-8 |location=London |pages=9–10 }}</ref>{{blockquote|When the title of my Bill was announced, I was frequently asked what kind of improvements for the chronically sick and disabled I had in mind. It always seemed best to begin with the problems of access. I explained that I wanted to remove the ''severe and gratuitous social handicaps inflicted on disabled people'', and often on their families and friends, not just by their exclusion from town and county halls, art galleries, libraries and many of the universities, but even from pubs, restaurants, theatres, cinemas and other places of entertainment ... I explained that I and my friends were concerned to stop society from treating disabled people as if they were a separate species.}}The history of the social model of disability begins with the history of the [[disability rights movement]]. Around 1970, various groups in [[North America]], including [[List of sociologists|sociologists]], disabled people, and disability-focused [[Political organisation|political groups]], began to pull away from the accepted medical lens of viewing disability. Instead, they began to discuss things like [[oppression]], [[Civil and political rights|civil rights]], and [[accessibility]]. This change in [[discourse]] resulted in conceptualizations of disability that was rooted in social constructs.<ref name=":0">{{cite journal |last1=Oliver |first1=Mike |date=October 2013 |title=The social model of disability: thirty years on |journal=Disability & Society |volume=28 |issue=7 |pages=1024–1026 |doi=10.1080/09687599.2013.818773 |s2cid=145557887}}</ref>

In 1975, the UK organization [[Union of the Physically Impaired Against Segregation]] (UPIAS)<ref>{{Cite book |last=Baldwinson |first=Tony |title=UPIAS - The Union of the Physically Impaired Against Segregation (1972-1990) : a public record from private files |date=2019 |publisher=TBR Imprint |isbn=978-1-913148-01-0 |oclc=1099943533 }}{{page needed|date=October 2020}}</ref> claimed: "In our view it is society which disables physically impaired people. Disability is something imposed on top of our impairments by the way we are unnecessarily isolated and excluded from full participation in society."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies/archiveuk/UPIAS/fundamental%20principles.pdf |title=THE UNION OF THE PHYSICALLY IMPAIRED AGAINST SEGREGATION and THE DISABILITY ALLIANCE discuss Fundamental Principles of Disability |publisher=[[UPIAS]] |access-date=2010-10-23 |archive-date=23 September 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120923050911/http://www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies/archiveuk/UPIAS/fundamental |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies/archiveuk/finkelstein/UPIAS%20Principles%202.pdf |title=Fundamental Principles of Disability - Comments on the discussion held between the Union and the Disability Alliance on 22nd November, 1975 |publisher=[[UPIAS]] |access-date=2010-10-23 |archive-date=27 September 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120927020649/http://www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies/archiveuk/finkelstein/UPIAS |url-status=live }}</ref> This became known as the social interpretation, or social definition, of disability.<ref>{{cite book |last=Hunt |first=Judy |title=No limits : the disabled people's movement : a radical history |publisher=TBR Imprint |year=2019 |isbn=978-1-913148-02-7 |location=Manchester |page=107 |oclc=1108503896 }}</ref>

=== Mike Oliver ===
Following the UPIAS "social definition of disability", in 1983 the disabled academic [[Mike Oliver (disability advocate)|Mike Oliver]] coined the phrase ''social model of disability'' in reference to these ideological developments.<ref name="OliverSapey2006">{{cite book|author1=Michael Oliver|author2=Bob Sapey|title=Social work with disabled people|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=qqiUQgAACAAJ|year=2006|publisher=Palgrave Macmillan|isbn=978-1-4039-1838-3|access-date=4 November 2016|archive-date=19 July 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230719160032/https://books.google.com/books?id=qqiUQgAACAAJ|url-status=live}}</ref> Oliver focused on the idea of an individual model (of which the medical was a part) versus a social model, derived from the distinction originally made between impairment and disability by the UPIAS.<ref name="OliverSapey2006"/><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies/archiveuk/Oliver/in%20soc%20dis.pdf |first=Mike | last=Oliver |title=The individual and social models of disability |publisher=leeds.ac.uk |date=23 July 1990 |access-date=2012-11-10 |archive-date=18 November 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191118155527/https://disability-studies.leeds.ac.uk/library/ |url-status=live }}</ref> Oliver's seminal 1990 book ''The Politics of Disablement''<ref>{{cite book |last1=Oliver |first1=Michael |title=The Politics of Disablement |date=1990 |publisher=Macmillan Education |location=London |isbn=9780333432938}}</ref> is widely cited as a major moment in the adoption of this model. The book included just three pages about the social model of disability.<ref name=":0" />

=== Developments ===
The "social model" was extended and developed by academics and activists in Australia, the UK, the US, and other countries to include all disabled people, including those who have [[learning disabilities]], [[intellectually disabled |intellectual disabilities]], or emotional, mental health or behavioural problems.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://old.bfi.org.uk/education/teaching/disability/thinking/medical.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120803101331/http://old.bfi.org.uk/education/teaching/disability/thinking/medical.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=2012-08-03 |title=Disabling Imagery? &#124; Ways of thinking about disability: 'Medical Model' vs 'Social Model' &#124; Learning resources&#124; BFI |website=Old.bfi.org.uk |date=2010-03-22 |access-date=2016-01-14}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Goodley|first=Dan|title='Learning Difficulties', the Social Model of Disability and Impairment: Challenging epistemologies|journal=Disability & Society|date=1 March 2001|volume=16|issue=2|pages=207–231|doi=10.1080/09687590120035816|s2cid=143447725}}</ref>

== Tool for cultural analysis ==
The social model has become a key tool in the analysis of the cultural representation of disability; from literature, to radio, to charity-imagery to cinema. The social model has become the key conceptual analysis in challenging, for examples, stereotypes and archetypes of disabled people by revealing how conventional imagery reinforces the oppression of disabled people. Key theorists include [[Paul Darke]] (cinema), Lois Keith<ref>{{Cite web|last=Gardner|first=Lyn|date=3 February 2001|title=Cured by submission|url=https://www.theguardian.com/books/2001/feb/03/society|website=The Guardian|access-date=5 October 2020|archive-date=8 October 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201008210735/https://www.theguardian.com/books/2001/feb/03/society|url-status=live}}</ref> (literature), [[Lennard J. Davis|Leonard Davis]] (Deaf culture), Jenny Sealey<ref>{{Cite web|last=Theatre Company|first=Graeae|date=2020|title=Who We Are|url=https://graeae.org/about/who-we-are/|access-date=5 October 2020|archive-date=11 October 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201011121756/https://graeae.org/about/who-we-are/|url-status=live}}</ref> (theatre) and Mary-Pat O'Malley<ref>{{cite journal |last1=O'Malley |first1=Mary-Pat |title=Falling between frames: Institutional discourse and disability in radio |journal=Journal of Pragmatics |date=1 February 2009 |volume=41 |issue=2 |pages=346–356 |doi=10.1016/j.pragma.2008.07.008 }}</ref> (radio).

==Components and usage==

A fundamental aspect of the social model concerns [[Equality of outcome|equality]]. The struggle for equality is often compared to the struggles of other socially marginalized groups. Equal rights are said to [[Empowerment|empower]] people with the "ability" to make decisions and the opportunity to live life to the fullest. A related phrase often used by disability rights activists, as with other [[social activism]], is "[[Nothing About Us Without Us]]".<ref name="Charlton2000">{{cite book|author=James I. Charlton|title=Nothing about us without us: disability oppression and empowerment|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ohqff8DBt9gC|year=2000|publisher=University of California Press|isbn=978-0-520-22481-0|page=3|access-date=4 November 2016|archive-date=19 July 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230719160033/https://books.google.com/books?id=ohqff8DBt9gC|url-status=live}}</ref>

The social model of disability focuses on changes required in society. These might be in terms of:

*Attitudes, for example a more positive attitude towards certain mental traits or behaviors, or not underestimating the potential quality of life of disabled people,
*Social support, for example help dealing with barriers; resources, aids, or [[positive discrimination]] to provide equal access, for example providing someone to explain work culture for an autistic employee.
*Information, for example using suitable formats (e.g. [[braille]]), levels (e.g. simplicity of language) or coverage (e.g. explaining issues others may take for granted),
*Physical structures, for example buildings with sloped access and elevators, or
*Flexible work hours for people with [[circadian rhythm sleep disorders]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/advice-and-guidance/your-rights/disability/disability-in-employment/examples-of-reasonable-adjustments-in-the-workplace/ |title=EHRC - Examples of reasonable adjustments in the workplace |publisher=Equalityhumanrights.com |date=2010-10-01 |access-date=2012-11-10 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121023033858/http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/advice-and-guidance/your-rights/disability/disability-in-employment/examples-of-reasonable-adjustments-in-the-workplace/ |archive-date=23 October 2012}}</ref>

=== Limitations and criticisms ===
Oliver did not intend the social model of disability to be an all-encompassing theory of disability, but rather a starting point in reframing how society views disability.<ref name=":0" /> This model was conceived of as a tool that could be used to improve the lives of disabled people, rather than a complete explanation for every experience and circumstance.<ref name=":0" /> An unintended consequence Oliver foresaw of the adoption of the social model of disability in politics was the undermining of the efforts of disabled people seeking social justice. <ref name=":1" /> Similarly, Tom Shakespeare has argued that the strong social model fails to correspond to the everyday experience of disabled people, many of whom experience physical and mental difficulties, as well as social barriers and exclusion. <ref>{{Cite journal |last=Shakespeare |first=Tom |date=2004 |title=Social Model of disability and other life strategies |url=https://sjdr.se/articles/151/files/submission/proof/151-1-526-1-10-20171113.pdf |journal=[[Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research]] |volume=6 |issue=1 |pages=8-21}}</ref> 

A primary criticism of the social model is its centring of the experiences of individuals with physical impairments, which has resulted in overlooking other forms of disability, such as mental health conditions.<ref name=":1">{{Cite book |last=Morgan |first=Hannah |title=The Routledge International Handbook of Mad Studies |publisher=[[Routledge]] |year=2021 |isbn=978-0-429-46544-4 |editor-last=Beresford |editor-first=Peter |pages=108–118 |language=English |chapter=Mad Studies and disability studies |doi=10.4324/9780429465444-16 |chapter-url=https://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/id/eprint/161614/1/Morgan_2020_Mad_Studies_and_Disability_Studies_AAM.pdf |editor-last2=Russo |editor-first2=Jasna}}</ref>  

A secondary criticism relates to how the social model underplays impairments' impacts.<ref name=":0" /><ref name=":1" /> That is, the focus on how the social environment can cause disablement may ignore the fact that impairments "can be restrictive, painful and unpleasant".<ref name=":1" />{{Rp|page=111}}

Conversely, some argue against the language of impairment, indicating that some disabilities are purely social and that no impairment exists, such as within the Deaf community.<ref name=":1" /> This relates to a critique regarding the belief of a species norm, wherein there is a "normal" human body, and all variations to the norm may be considered "impairments".<ref name=":2">{{Cite journal |last1=Chapman |first1=Robert |last2=Carel |first2=Havi |date=2022 |title=Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life |journal=[[Journal of Social Philosophy]] |language=en |volume=53 |issue=4 |pages=614–631 |doi=10.1111/josp.12456 |issn=0047-2786 |doi-access=free |hdl=1983/74fb2e49-bc7a-4009-a42e-528ae77ff267 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> Some activists and academic argue that this reliance on a species norm still implies that impairments are deficits, meaning this model is still strongly connected to [[Medical model of disability|deficit models of disability]].<ref name=":1" /><ref name=":2" /> That is, to be considered disabled, an individual must state they have an impairment, which implies, to some degree, that they are damaged.<ref name=":1" /><ref name=":2" /> To an extent can have impacts on how government can distribute benefits on ground of impairments that may be more significant and those that are not. Thus, some needs are not met on the basis of not having an impairment significant enough to receive aid, which can be a negative application of the social model within government policy.<ref name=":0" /> Newer paradigms, such as [[Mad studies]] and [[neurodiversity]] studies, recognize a broad spectrum of human experience without a focus on a species norm and thus, deviances from that norm that may be considered impairments or deficits.<ref name=":2" /> 

The social model has also been criticized for not promoting the normal differences between disabled people, who can be any age, gender, race, and sexual orientation, and instead presenting them as a monolithic, [[Individuation|insufficiently individuated]] group of people.<ref name=":0" />

Despite these criticisms, academics whose work involves disability indicate that the social model is still beneficial in helping people begin to rethink disability beyond deficit.<ref name=":1" /> As Finkelstein states: "A good model can enable us to see something which we do not understand because in the model it can be seen from different viewpoints [...] that can trigger insights that we might not otherwise develop."<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Finkelstein |first=Vic |date=2001-12-01 |title=The Social Model of Disability Repossessed |url=https://disability-studies.leeds.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/40/library/finkelstein-soc-mod-repossessed.pdf |journal=Manchester Coalition of Disabled People |pages=1–5 |access-date=19 July 2023 |archive-date=30 January 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230130095652/https://disability-studies.leeds.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/40/library/finkelstein-soc-mod-repossessed.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref>{{Rp|page=3}}

== As an identity ==
In the late 20th century and early 21st century, the social model of disability became a dominant feature of [[Identity (social science)|identities]] for disabled people in the UK.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Shakespeare |first1=Tom |last2=Watson |first2=Nicholas |title=Defending the Social Model |journal=Disability & Society |date=April 1997 |volume=12 |issue=2 |pages=293–300 |doi=10.1080/09687599727380 }}</ref> Under the social model of disability, a disability identity is created by "the presence of impairment, the experience of disablism and self- identification as a disabled person."<ref name=":1" />{{Rp|page=110}}

The social model of disability implies that attempts to change, "fix", or "cure" individuals, especially when used against the wishes of the individual, can be discriminatory and prejudiced. This attitude, which may be seen as stemming from a medical model and a subjective value system, can harm the self-esteem and social inclusion of those constantly subjected to it (e.g. being told they are not as good or valuable, in an overall and core sense, as others). Some communities have actively resisted "treatments", while, for example, defending a unique culture or set of abilities. In the Deaf community, sign language is valued even if most people do not know it, and some parents argue against [[cochlear implant |cochlear implants]] for deaf infants who cannot consent to them.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Cooper |first=Amelia |date=2019 |title=Hear Me Out |journal=Missouri Medicine |volume=116 |issue=6 |pages=469–471 |issn=0026-6620 |pmc=6913847 |pmid=31911722}}</ref>{{failed verification|date=June 2021}} [[Autistic]] people may say that their "unusual" behavior, which they say can serve an important purpose to them, should not have to be [[Autistic masking|suppressed to please others]]. They argue instead for acceptance of [[neurodiversity]] and accommodation to different needs and goals.<ref>{{cite web |last=Seidel |first=Kathleen |url=http://www.neurodiversity.com/autistic_distinction.html |title=the autistic distinction |work=neurodiversity.com |date=2004-08-20 |access-date=2012-11-10 |archive-date=18 October 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181018104420/http://www.neurodiversity.com/autistic_distinction.html |url-status=live }}</ref> Some people diagnosed with a [[mental disorder]] argue that they are just different and do not necessarily conform. The [[biopsychosocial model]] of disease/disability is an attempt by practitioners to address this.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Engel |first1=G. |title=The need for a new medical model: a challenge for biomedicine |journal=Science |date=8 April 1977 |volume=196 |issue=4286 |pages=129–136 |doi=10.1126/science.847460 |pmid=847460 |bibcode=1977Sci...196..129E }}</ref>

The label "neurodiversity" has been used by various mental-disability rights advocates within the context of the social model of disability.<ref name="Bloomsbury2">{{Cite book|last=Chapman|first=Robert|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=PV95DwAAQBAJ|title=The Bloomsbury Companion to Philosophy of Psychiatry|date=2019-01-10|publisher=Bloomsbury Publishing|isbn=9781350024069|editor-last=Tekin|editor-first=Serife|pages=371–387|language=en|chapter=Neurodiversity Theory and Its Discontents: Autism, Schizophrenia, and the Social Model of Disability|editor-last2=Bluhm|editor-first2=Robyn|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=PV95DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA371|access-date=28 November 2021|archive-date=19 July 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230719160012/https://books.google.com/books?id=PV95DwAAQBAJ|url-status=live}}</ref> The label, originally associated with autism, has been applied to other neurodevelopmental conditions or neurodivergences, such as [[attention deficit hyperactivity disorder]], [[Speech disorder|developmental speech disorders]], [[dyslexia]], [[dysgraphia]], [[Developmental coordination disorder|dyspraxia]], [[dyscalculia]], [[Anomic aphasia|dysnomia]], [[intellectual disability]], and [[Tourette syndrome]],<ref name="Woodford">Woodford, Gillian. [http://www.nationalreviewofmedicine.com/issue/2006/04_30/3_patients_practice05_8.html 'We Don't Need to be Cured' Autistics Say] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160303202254/http://www.nationalreviewofmedicine.com/issue/2006/04_30/3_patients_practice05_8.html|date=2016-03-03}}. National Review of Medicine. Volume 3. No. 8. 30 April 2006. Retrieved 23 February 2008.</ref><ref name="Mackenzie 2011-01-31">{{cite journal|last=Mackenzie|first=Robin|author2=John Watts|date=2011-01-31|title=Is our legal, health care and social support infrastructure neurodiverse enough? How far are the aims of the neurodiversity movement fulfilled for those diagnosed with cognitive disability and learning disability?|journal=Tizard Learning Disability Review|volume=16|issue=1|pages=30–37|doi=10.5042/tldr.2011.0005|quote=We recommend, therefore, that the term neurodiverse include the conditions ASD, ADHD, OCD, language disorders, developmental coordination disorder, dyslexia and Tourette's syndrome.}}</ref> as well as [[schizophrenia]],<ref name="Bloomsbury2"/><ref>Morrice, Polly (29 January 2006) [https://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/books/review/29morrice.html "Otherwise Minded"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170913033836/https://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/books/review/otherwise-minded.html |date=13 September 2017 }} ''The New York Times'', review of ''A Mind Apart: Travels in a Neurodiverse World''</ref> [[bipolar disorder]],<ref>{{Cite book|last=Singer|first=Judy|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Ox_7uQEACAAJ|title=NeuroDiversity: The Birth of an Idea|date=2016-06-03|publisher=[[Judy Singer]]|isbn=978-0648154709|language=en|quote=There is much greater community awareness of neurological "tribes" like the autistic, ADHD, or bipolar. We increasingly see these manifestations of diversity in terms of their gifts and challenges rather than their drawbacks.|access-date=22 March 2023|archive-date=19 July 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230719160051/https://books.google.com/books?id=Ox_7uQEACAAJ|url-status=live}}</ref> and some mental health conditions such as [[schizoaffective disorder]], [[antisocial personality disorder]],<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Anton|first1=Audrey L.|year=2013|title=The Virtue of Sociopaths: how to appreciate the neurodiversity of sociopathy without becoming a victim|url=https://www.academia.edu/2034622|journal=Ethics and Neurodiversity|access-date=2015-08-02|archive-date=10 December 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191210222329/https://www.academia.edu/2034622/The_Virtue_of_Sociopaths_how_to_appreciate_the_neurodiversity_of_sociopathy_without_becoming_a_victim|url-status=live}}</ref> dissociative disorders, and [[obsessive–compulsive disorder]].<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Armstrong|first1=Thomas|date=April 2015|title=The Myth of the Normal Brain: Embracing Neurodiversity|url=http://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/2015/04/msoc1-1504.html|journal=AMA Journal of Ethics|volume=17|issue=4|pages=348–352|doi=10.1001/journalofethics.2015.17.4.msoc1-1504|pmid=25901703|access-date=2015-08-05|doi-access=free|archive-date=24 June 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180624082820/http://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/2015/04/msoc1-1504.html|url-status=live|url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref name=":4" /> The social model itself implies that neurodivergent people are living behind barriers that inhibit participation in everyday life. Language associated with warfare such as "battling" or "combatting" is thus replaced with language that de-pathologizes neurodivergence. Advocates for a social model of disability argue instead that neurodivergence should be looked at through the lens of societal or relational models of disability.<ref name=":2" />

The social model implies that practices such as [[eugenics]] are founded on social values and a prejudiced understanding of the potential and value of those labeled disabled. "Over 200,000 disabled people were some of the earlier victims of the [[Holocaust]], after Communists, other political enemies, and homosexuals."<ref name=":4">[http://www.eastrenfrewshire.gov.uk/holocaust/holocaust_remembrance_2004_-_other_victims/holocaust_remembrance_2004_-_disabled___the_holocaust.htm] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090417064037/http://www.eastrenfrewshire.gov.uk/holocaust/holocaust_remembrance_2004_-_other_victims/holocaust_remembrance_2004_-_disabled___the_holocaust.htm|date=17 April 2009}}</ref>

A 1986 article stated:<ref>{{cite journal|last=Brisenden|first=Simon|title=Independent Living and the Medical Model of Disability|journal=Disability, Handicap & Society|date=1 January 1986|volume=1|issue=2|pages=173–178|doi=10.1080/02674648666780171}}</ref>{{blockquote|It is important that we do not allow ourselves to be dismissed as if we all come under this one great metaphysical category 'the disabled'. The effect of this is a depersonalization, a sweeping dismissal of our individuality, and a denial of our right to be seen as people with our own uniqueness, rather than as the anonymous constituents of a category or group. These words that lump us all together – 'the disabled', 'spina bifida', 'tetraplegic', 'muscular dystrophy', – are nothing more than terminological rubbish bins into which all the important things about us as people get thrown away.}}

== Economic aspects ==
The social model also relates to economic empowerment, proposing that people can be disabled by a lack of resources to meet their needs.<ref name=":0" /> For example, a disabled person may need support services to be able to participate fully in society, and can become disabled if society cuts access to those support services, perhaps in the name of [[Austerity|government austerity]] measures.

The social model addresses other issues, such as the underestimation of the potential of disabled people to contribute to society and add economic value to society if they are given equal rights and equally suitable facilities and opportunities as others. Economic research on companies that attempt to accommodate disability in their workforce suggest they [[Return on Disability Index|outperform competitors]].<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.economist.com/node/21562229 |date=8 September 2012 |title=Disability and business: The new green |newspaper=The Economist |access-date=26 April 2015 |archive-date=27 June 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150627100253/http://www.economist.com/node/21562229 |url-status=live }}</ref>

In Autumn 2001, the UK Office for National Statistics identified that approximately one-fifth of the working-age population was disabled, equating to an estimated 7.1 million disabled people, compared to an estimated 29.8 million nondisabled people. This analysis also provided insight into some of the reasons why disabled people were not in the labor market, such as that the reduction in disability benefits in entering the labor market would not make it worthwhile to enter into employment. A three-pronged approach was suggested: "incentives to work via the tax and benefit system, for example through the Disabled Person's Tax Credit; helping people back into work, for example via the New Deal for Disabled People; and tackling discrimination in the workplace via anti-discrimination policy. Underpinning this are the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) 1995 and the Disability Rights Commission."<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Smith |first1=Allan |last2=Twomey |first2=Breda |title=Labour market experiences of people with disabilities |journal=Labour Market Trends |volume=110 |issue=8 |date=August 2002 |pages=415–427 |url=https://s3.amazonaws.com/escoe-website/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/12151642/Labour-Market-Trends-Aug-2002.pdf |access-date=5 October 2020 |archive-date=6 October 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211006191042/https://s3.amazonaws.com/escoe-website/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/12151642/Labour-Market-Trends-Aug-2002.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref>

[[Canada]] and the [[United States]] have operated under the premise that social assistance benefits should not exceed the amount of money earned through labour in order to give citizens an [[incentive]] to search for and maintain [[employment]]. This has led to widespread [[poverty]] amongst disabled citizens. In the 1950s, disability pensions were established and included various forms of direct economic assistance; however, compensation was low. Since the 1970s, both governments have viewed unemployed, disabled citizens as excess labor due to continuous high unemployment rates and have made minimal attempts to increase employment, keeping disabled people at poverty-level incomes due to the 'incentive' principle. Poverty is the most debilitating circumstance disabled people face, resulting in the inability to afford proper [[Medicine|medical]], [[Technology|technological]] and other assistance necessary to participate in society.<ref>.{{cite book|last=Wendell|first=Wendell|url=http://moodle.fhs.cuni.cz/pluginfile.php/19118/mod_resource/content/0/Wendell_Social_construction.pdf|title=The Social Construction of Disability|publisher=Routledge Taylor & Francis Group|year=1996|pages=60|access-date=18 October 2021|archive-date=18 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211018064934/http://moodle.fhs.cuni.cz/pluginfile.php/19118/mod_resource/content/0/Wendell_Social_construction.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref>

==Law and public policy==
In the [[United Kingdom]], the [[Disability Discrimination Act 1995]] defines disability using the medical model – disabled people are defined as people with certain conditions or limitations on their ability to carry out "normal day-to-day activities." But the requirement of employers and service providers to make "reasonable adjustments" to their policies or practices, or physical aspects of their premises, follows the social model.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/DisabledPeople/RightsAndObligations/DisabilityRights/DG_4001068 |title=Definition of disability under the Equality Act 2010 - GOV.UK |publisher=Direct.gov.uk |date=2012-10-22 |access-date=2012-11-10 |archive-date=15 October 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121015094714/http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/DisabledPeople/RightsAndObligations/DisabilityRights/DG_4001068 |url-status=live }}</ref> By making adjustments, employers and service providers are removing the barriers that disable, according to the social model. In 2006, amendments to the act called for local authorities and others to actively promote disability equality; this was enforced via the formation of the Disability Equality Duty in December 2006.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.dotheduty.org/ |title=コアサーバーdotheduty.org |website=Dotheduty.org |access-date=2016-01-14 |archive-date=3 February 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120203174409/http://dotheduty.org/ |url-status=live }}</ref> In 2010, the [[Disability Discrimination Act 1995]] was amalgamated into the [[Equality Act 2010]], along with other pertinent discrimination legislation. The Equality Act 2010 extends the law on discrimination to indirect discrimination. For example, if a carer of a disabled person is discriminated against, this is now also unlawful.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.equalities.gov.uk/equality_act_2010.aspx |title=Home Office |publisher=Equalities |access-date=2012-11-10 |archive-date=12 July 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110712182650/http://www.equalities.gov.uk/equality_act_2010.aspx |url-status=dead }}</ref> Since October 2010, when it came into effect, employers may not legally ask questions about illness or disability at interviews for a job or for a referee to comment on such in a reference, except where there is a need to make reasonable adjustments for an interview to proceed. Following an offer of a job, an employer can lawfully ask such questions.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.thebottomlineonline.co.uk/pages/fullarticle.asp?id=222 |title=Previous Issues of The Bottom Line Online |publisher=Thebottomlineonline.co.uk |access-date=2012-11-10 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120320201637/http://www.thebottomlineonline.co.uk/pages/fullarticle.asp?id=222 |archive-date=20 March 2012}}</ref>

In the [[United States]], the [[Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990]] (ADA), is a wide-ranging [[civil rights]] law that prohibits discrimination based on disability in a wide range of settings.<ref>{{cite web|title=AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF 1990, AS AMENDED|url=http://www.ada.gov/pubs/adastatute08.pdf|access-date=2016-01-14|website=Ada.gov|archive-date=12 November 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171112043524/https://www.ada.gov/pubs/adastatute08.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref> The ADA was the first civil rights law of its kind in the world and affords protections against discrimination to disabled Americans. The law was modeled after the [[Civil Rights Act of 1964]], which made discrimination based on [[Race (classification of human beings)|race]], [[religion]], [[sex]], national origin, and other characteristics illegal. It requires that mass transportation, commercial buildings, and public accommodations be accessible to disabled people.

In 2007, the [[European Court of Justice]] in the ''[[Chacón Navas v Eurest Colectividades SA]]'' court case, defined disability narrowly according to a [[medical model of disability|medical definition]] that excluded temporary illness, when considering the [[Directive establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation]] (Council Directive 2000/78/EC). The directive did not provide for any definition of disability, despite discourse in policy documents previously in the EU about endorsing the social model of disability. This allowed the Court of Justice to take a narrow medical definition.{{citation needed|date=January 2011}}

== Technology ==
Over the last several decades, [[technology]] has transformed networks, services, and communication by promoting the rise of telecommunications, computer use, etc. This [[Digital Revolution]] has changed how people work, learn, and interact, moving these basic human activities to technological platforms. However, many people who use such technology experience a form of disability. Even if it is not physically visible, those with, for example cognitive impairments, hand tremors, or vision impairments, have some form of disability that prohibit them from fully accessing technology in the way that those without a "technological disability" do.

In ''Disability and New Media'', Katie Ellis and Mike Kent state that "technology is often presented as a source of liberation; however, developments associated with [[Web 2.0]] show that this is not always the case".<ref name="Disability and new media">{{cite book|last1=Ellis|first1=Katie|title=Disability and new media|last2=Kent|first2=Mike|date=17 December 2010|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-0-203-83191-5}}</ref> They go on to state that the technological advancement of Web 2.0 is tethered to social ideology and stigma which "routinely disables people with disability".<ref name="Disability and new media" />

In ''Digital Disability: The Social Construction of Disability in New Media'', Gregg Goggin and Christopher Newell call for an innovative understanding of new media and disability issues.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Goggin|first1=Gerard|title=Digital disability: the social construction of disability in new media|last2=Newell|first2=Christopher|publisher=Rowman & Littlefield|year=2003|isbn=0-7425-1844-2}}</ref> They trace developments ranging from telecommunications to assistive technologies to offer a technoscience of disability, which offers a global perspective on how disabled people are represented as users, consumers, viewers, or listeners of new media, by policymakers, corporations, programmers, and disabled people themselves.

== Social construction of disability ==

The social construction of disability comes from a [[paradigm]] that suggests that [[society]]'s beliefs about a particular community, group, or population are grounded in the [[power structure]]s inherent in that society at any given time. The social expectations surrounding concepts, such as disability, thereby enabling a social construct around what society deems disabled and healthy, often based more on observations or value judgements rather than scientific discovery, which can perpetuate biases.<ref name=":2" /> 

Ideas surrounding disability stem from societal attitudes, often connected to who is deserving or undeserving, and deemed [[productive]] to society at any given time. For example, in the [[Middle Ages|medieval period]], a person's [[moral]] behavior established disability. Disability was a divine [[punishment]] or [[side effect]] of a moral failing; being physically or biologically different was not enough to be considered disabled. Only during the [[Age of Enlightenment]] did society change its [[definition]] of disability to be more related to [[biology]]. However, what most<!-- elite? --> [[Western Europe]]ans considered to be healthy determined the new biological definition of [[health]].<ref name="DavisLennardDSR">{{Cite book
| title = The Disability Studies Reader
| last = Davis
| first = Lennard
| publisher = Routledge 2nd edition
| year = 2006
| isbn = 0415953340
| location = 
| pages = 197
}}</ref> 

=== 2000 Paralympics ===
While the Olympics were covered live throughout the entire event, the Paralympics were not seen as important enough for the same live coverage before the initial showing. By separating the Olympics and Paralympics, and thus indicating that one is less valuable than the other, disability is socially constructed.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Goggin|first1=Gerard|title=Digital disability: the social construction of disability in new media|last2=Newell|first2=Christopher|publisher=Rowman & Littlefield|year=2003|page=91|isbn=0-7425-1844-2}}</ref>

== Applications ==
Applying the social model of disability can change goals and care plans. For example, with the medical model of disability, the goal may be to help a child acquire typical abilities and to reduce impairment. With the social model, the goal may be to have a child be included in the normal life of the community, such as attending birthday parties and other social events, regardless of the level of function.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Engber|first=Daniel|date=2021-10-06|title=Can Robots Heal an Injured Brain?|url=https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2021/11/engineers-daughter-tbi-rehab/620172/|access-date=2021-10-19|website=The Atlantic|language=en|archive-date=19 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211019031542/https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2021/11/engineers-daughter-tbi-rehab/620172/|url-status=live}}</ref> In doing so would create a new norm associated with differently abled people as well as neurodiverse people as well. Allowing for this kind of diversity to be viewed as both valuable and desirable for society.<ref name=":2" /> As well, this could include designed spaces and aides that could assist disabled people through the context of universal design, which could help normalize disability through the creation of inclusive spaces.<ref name=":3" />   

=== Education ===

It has been suggested that disability education tries to restore the idea of a moral community, one in which the members question what constitutes a good life, reimagine education, see physical and mental conditions as part of a range of abilities, consider that different talents are distributed in different ways, and understand that all talents should be recognized. In this system, all students would be included in the educational network instead of being set apart as special cases, and it would be acknowledged that all humans have individual needs.<ref>{{cite book|last=Capper|first=Colleen|title=Educational Administration in a Pluralistic Society|date=July 1993|publisher=State University of New York Pr|isbn=978-0791413739|pages=173–174, 176–177}}</ref>

== See also ==
{{div col|colwidth=25em}}
* [[Ableism]]
* [[Assisted living]]
* [[Autism-friendly]]
* [[Capability approach]]
* [[Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities]]
* [[Curb cut effect]]
* [[Deaf rights movement]]
* [[Disability in the media]]
* [[Disability justice]] 
* [[Drapetomania]]
* [[Epistemic injustice]]
* [[Equality Act (disambiguation)|Equality Act]]
* [[Hostile architecture]]
* [[Inclusion (disability rights)]]
* [[Inspiration porn]]
* [[Medical–industrial complex|Medical industrial complex]]
* [[Medicalization]]
* [[Models of deafness]]
* [[Neurodiversity and labor rights]]
* [[Normalization (people with disabilities)]]
* [[People-first language]]
* [[Redundant elevators]]
* [[Sensory friendly]]
* [[Services and supports for people with disabilities]]
* [[Sexuality and disability]]
* [[Social constructionism]]
* [[Survivorship bias]]
* [[The Fox and the Stork]]
* [[Universal design]]
* [[Web accessibility]]
{{div col end}}

==Further reading==

* {{Cite book |title=The new politics of disablement |last1=Oliver |first1=Michael |date=2012 |publisher=Palgrave Macmillan |last2=Barnes |first2=Colin |isbn=978-0-230-39244-1 |location=Houndmills, Basingstoke |oclc=963741473}}

==References==
{{Reflist}}

==External links==
{{commons category}}
* UK [[Disability Rights Commission]]: [https://web.archive.org/web/20090127034752/http://83.137.212.42/sitearchive/DRC/citizenship/howtouse/socialmodel/index.html The Social Model of Disability]. Accessed 2009-10-15.
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20070322010354/http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/asp/gateway.asp?hr=%2Fen%2Fhip%2Fodi%2Fdocuments%2FDefinitions%2FDefinitions003.shtml&hs= Article on Disability Perspectives and Data Sources] from Government of Canada.
*{{cite journal |author=Chapireau F, Colvez A |title=Social disadvantage in the international classification of impairments, disabilities, and handicap |journal=Soc Sci Med |volume=47 |issue=1 |pages=59–66 |date=July 1998 |pmid=9683379 |doi=10.1016/S0277-9536(98)00033-1|last2=Colvez }}
*{{cite journal |last1=Kearney |first1=PM |last2=Pryor |first2=J |title=The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) and nursing |journal=J Adv Nurs |volume=46 |issue=2 |pages=162–70 |date=April 2004 |pmid=15056329 |doi=10.1111/j.1365-2648.2003.02976.x}}

{{Disability navbox}}
{{Discrimination}}

[[Category:Disability]]
[[Category:Disability rights]]
[[Category:Disability studies]]
[[Category:Accessibility]]
[[Category:Medical sociology]]
[[Category:Medical models]]
[[Category:Political theories]]
[[Category:Sociological theories]]
[[Category:Social theories]]
[[Category:Social constructionism]]
[[Category:Articles containing video clips]]