Constructions and Creations: idealism, materialism and disability theory

This paper suggests that a proper understanding of disability theory requires more than a distinction between individual and social model approaches. It is also helpful to distinguish between materialist and idealist explanations. These two dimensions are used to generate a four-fold typology which highlights important differences between the main approaches. Social models are distinguished as those premised upon commonality. However, it is argued that recent discourses of 'difference' do not detract from social model theory. Social model approaches are examined in more detail and the paper concludes that although social constructionist accounts have been useful they do not provide a sufficient level of explanation. Disabling social values reflect material relations of power and may be better explained as 'ideology'.     

Disability Studies: a historical materialist view

This paper presents an historical materialist view of recent accounts of disability in Western societies. This view is presented in two main parts: first, as an in-depth appraisal of the field of disability studies, and secondly, as an outline for an alternative, historical materialist account of disablement. The critical assessment of disability studies finds that recent accounts of disability are in the main seriously deficient in terms of both epistemology and historiography (though some important exceptions are identified). In particular, four specific areas of theoretical weakness are identified: theoretical superficiality, idealism, the fixation with normality, and an unwillingness to consider history seriously. It is argued that these deficiencies have prevented the field of disability studies from realising its potential to challenge the structures which oppress impaired people. From this critical epistemological perspective, an outline is made of an alternative, materialist account of disability, stressing both theoretical and political agendas.     

Siblinghood through disability studies perspectives: diversifying discourse and knowledge about siblings with and without disabilities

Research about siblings where one has a disability has historically focused on the psychological outcomes of siblings of people with disabilities and has very rarely asked people with disabilities about their sibling relationships. This research focus represents the common individualizing approach and under-representation of people with disabilities that disability studies has argued against. Tracing the history of research about siblings and disability through de/institutionalization and towards current broader theories in disability studies, this article suggests that a range of disability studies perspectives can usefully de-individualize and expand research about siblings where one has a disability. Through examples of how materialist, feminist and inclusive perspectives can be applied to open up research about siblings and disability, the article argues that viewing siblinghood through the range of disability studies perspectives has the potential to expand this research field and represent new facets of siblings’ identities and lives together.     

Social justice: redistribution and recognition—a non-reductionist perspective on disability

The purpose of this article is to present some recent contributions to discussions on social justice and recognition in the context of disability research. Nancy Fraser's theory of redistribution and recognition, and her endeavour to include both a materialist and a cultural perspective in a theory of justice is examined. We also discuss Honneth's Hegelian-informed model of recognition. Critical realism, emphasizing a non-reductionist perspective, is briefly presented and, finally, we put forward some ideas on how to analyse and understand disability within such a framework.     

Dis/entangling critical disability studies

Recently there has been discussion about the emergence of critical disability studies. In this paper I provide an inevitably partial and selective account of this trans-disciplinary space through reference to a number of emerging insights, including theorizing through materialism, bodies that matter, inter/trans-sectionality, global disability studies, and self and Other. I briefly disentangle these themes and suggest that while we may well start with disability, we often never end with it as we engage with other transformative arenas including feminist, critical race and queer theories. Yet critical disability studies reminds us of the centrality of disability when we consider the politics of life itself. In this sense, then, disability becomes entangled with other forms of oppression and revolutionary responses.     

Disrupting global disability frameworks: settler-colonialism and the geopolitics of disability in Palestine/Israel

In recent years, Israel has seen an increase in disability studies scholarship and disability rights activism. At the same time, critical disability studies scholars have begun calling attention to the role of colonization and neocolonial powers, too often obscured in disability studies work, in disabling oppressed nations. This article brings these critiques in conversation with disability studies scholarship regarding Occupied Palestine to argue that disability is inextricably intertwined with the settler-colonial project of the Israeli state. By highlighting the geopolitical production of disablement, this work suggests that social approaches to disability have largely effaced disability injustice rooted in geopolitical power imbalances.     

How is disability understood? An examination of sociological approaches

This paper considers sociological understandings of what constitutes disability. Current meanings of disability in both disability studies and medical sociology are examined and compared, using selected articles from leading authors in each discipline as case studies. These disciplines are often represented as offering starkly contrasting approaches to disability, with their differences amounting to a disciplinary 'divide'. It is argued that, on closer inspection, common ground can be found between some writers in disability studies and medical sociology. It is suggested that this situation has arisen because, in disability studies, the social relational understanding of disability developed by Vic Finkelstein and Paul Hunt in the 1970s has been lost over time, overshadowed by the rise to prominence of its offspring: the social model of disability. The paper concludes with some reflections on the need to revive a social relational understanding of disability.     

Making disability conferences more actively inclusive

In this article I explore how generic disability conferences can become more inclusive of participants with intellectual disability. Increased inclusivity entails adapting to the support needs of people with intellectual disability, in line with the principles and practice of inclusive research. In the article I consider three specific areas where there can be more inclusion – access to information related to the conference, access to knowledge imparted during the conference, and financial issues. While many good practices have been developed in these areas, it is important to ensure that inclusion is catered for in a systematic and pro-active manner, so that people with intellectual disability have increasingly more meaningful and active roles within disability studies and disability research.     

Engaging with materialism and material reality: critical disability studies and economic recession

Critical disability studies has been accused of preoccupation with cultural, lingual and discursive matters, and in doing so failing to adequately engage with the often-harsh material reality of disability. This has contributed to a circumstance in which disability studies has produced a lack of material focused directly upon economic processes. Concurrently, disabled people have encountered a momentous economic recession that has threatened their basic economic and human rights. This article seeks to address what is evidently a gap in the burgeoning critical disability and disability studies literature. That is, a gap largely uninhabited by attempts to apply a critical disability studies perspective to macro-economic processes. The article focuses predominantly on two facets of critical disability studies as identified by Goodley: the self and other, and intersectionality. The article concludes that critical disability studies has much to offer through the production of new understandings of economic processes.     

Is it possible to create a politically engaged,contextual psychology of disability?

Until recently disability studies has ignored questions regarding the psychological nature of oppression. Proponents of the social model have viewed such concerns as diversionary, diluting their emphasis on material and economic barriers to inclusion. This paper argues that the discipline’s role of reflecting and interrogating disablism will remain incomplete and lacking in transformative power without undertaking a psychological conceptualisation of disabled personhood. Some prior attempts at elaborating the social model to include the psychological realm have been presented; these are critiqued, and argued to lack truly psychological conceptualisation. Preliminary ideas regarding a proposed psychology of disablism are presented. The focus of this work will be the exploration of bi-directional links between disablist ideology and disabled subjectivity, operationalised through interpersonal and institutional processes of lifelong socialisation. Reflections towards development of the under-theorised notion of internalised oppression are presented. Conclusions are that a combination of critical psychoanalytic insights and the participatory methods of liberatory and feminist psychology hold promise in driving disability transformation.     

Service user research in social work and disability studies in the United Kingdom

In recent years, there has been growing interest in the involvement of service users in research as well as in research studies that are led by service users. Although this interest in service users’ roles in research has been evident in both social work and disability studies, the two research disciplines have remained remarkably separate in the United Kingdom. This paper examines the epistemological underpinnings of social work research and disability studies research and explores the tensions, possibilities and power dynamics of collaboration between the two research disciplines in the United Kingdom. It concludes by outlining possibilities for social model approaches to social work research.     

Reason,grace and charity: Augustine and the impact of church doctrine on the construction of intellectual disability

This paper examines how early church doctrine influenced the construction of and response to intellectual disability. Though the main focus of the paper is on intellectual disability, much of the discussion is more broadly relevant to other types of impairments and human differences. The vehicle for this examination is the work of the key figure in the development and codification of church doctrine, Augustine, Bishop of Hippo (354–430 CE). The paper concludes that while church doctrine mitigated the stark association of reason and human value found in classical Greek thought, it did not engender an attitude of equality in this world. The ideas of grace and the ‘divine plan’, while opening up a limited space for acceptance and broad equality in the eyes of God, also reinforced and legitimated an inferior position in this world, leaving those considered to have an intellectual disability on the margins of social life and subject to a charity ultimately undertaken for the salvation of the giver, rather than for the welfare of the recipient. Subsidiary themes related to the construction of intellectual disability, such as ‘object lessons to the wise’ or as ‘monsters’, use as sources of amusement, innocence and their association with children and the charity ethic, are also examined.     

Postmodern synergistic knowledge creation: extending the boundaries of disability studies

The tensions between the competing discourses of the medical and the social models of disability have traditionally provided a platform for discussion and research in the fields of disability studies and special needs education. Over the last 30 years a wealth of literature has consolidated the debate and produced particular knowledge of impairment and disability. In this paper we argue that by privileging notions of ‘deficit’ within these medical or social model perspectives the richness of the lived experience of people with impairments is denied. The individual becomes lost within a framework of medical symptoms or social inequalities. This paper considers alternative approaches which reveal a fuller picture of the lives of people with impairments. The authors conducted two separate empirical studies, one employing a Deleuzo‐Guattarian perspective, the other a Bourdieusian perspective. In this paper we illustrate how these theories of practice can reveal situated understandings of the individual with impairments and his/her daily life. By embracing new understandings and different theoretical perspectives we show how new knowledge can emerge to illuminate the fluid and ever‐changing notions of ‘disability’, ‘inclusion’ and ‘exclusion’, which form elements of the individual lived experience of the research participants.     

Exploring normativity in disability studies

Normativity is a concept that is often misapplied in disability studies, especially in ‘postconventional’ accounts, where the concept is conflated with ‘normal’, ‘normate’, or ‘standard’. This article addresses this confusion, explores the meaning and use of ‘normativity’, and presents some analytic tools to discuss normative issues of right and wrong. The article finishes by discussing examples where conceptual confusions result in confused normative judgments focusing in particular on agency, responsibility and moral status. The article argues that disability research should carefully consider the use of theories and empirical knowledge in the light of their ethical implications as well as the lived experiences of disability.     

The politics of disability and access: the Sydney 2000 Games experience

The article examines disability and access issues surrounding the Sydney 2000 Olympic and Paralympic Games. Central to this is an examination of the involvement of the Australian community of people with disabilities [1] within the Games. The Sydney Paralympic Games, in particular, was seen as a possible watershed event for developing accessible infrastructure, and raising awareness of disability and access issues. This paper draws on the official documents of the Games, newspaper accounts and disability organisation reports. The article first examines the major bodies charged with organising the Games, and the planning processes used to incorporate disability and access issues. It then examines a range of critical issues and their relationships with the disability community. Finally, the article provides an analysis of any likely legacies that the 2000 Games may have for Sydney's community of people with disabilities.     

Why do working relationships not change? The need for a new approach to disability partnership research and social change

Although researchers, service providers, and clients are determined to improve partnerships within disability services, a lack of partnership persists. Using our research as a case study, we reflect on three limitations of common research methods and social change techniques in this area. We suggest that typical approaches struggle to move beyond taken-for-granted ideas, common-sense solutions, and established ideology in the field of disability. Consequently, they often fail to reveal important barriers to collaboration, identify innovative solutions, or initiate meaningful improvements in partnership. We propose a new approach to partnership research and reform grounded in a pragmatic model of social change and argue that projects based on isolated or simplistic data, majority-rule decision-making, simple and efficient planning, and restricted inside perspectives (where storytelling is limited) must be complemented by observational studies, socio-cultural analyses, and critical investigations. In short, we must understand why working relationships do not change to improve disability services.     

Sexual Abuse by Design: an examination of the issues in learning disability services

This paper is based upon ideas developed by the authors during their past 6 years work on issues of sexuality and sexual abuse in a wide variety of learning disability settings in Britain. The paper argues that some features of service design in themselves make sexual abuse more likely to occur. It suggests ways of reducing risk, which should work alongside the more usually suggested educative approaches to individuals and groups of vulnerable people.     

Epistemological journeys in participatory action research: alliances between community psychology and disability studies

This paper seeks to explore emancipatory disability research possibilities through the use of participatory action research and the cross-fertilisation of ideas between British disability studies (DS) and community psychology (CP). First, we consider the psychology in CP and suggest that it is far removed from mainstream psychology's pathological vision of disabled people. Second, we draw on Burrell and Morgan's (1979) model of paradigms to interrogate research practice in DS and CP. Third, we compare and contrast research narratives from DS and CP through reference to some examples of our own research. We argue that CP pays particular attention to the development of community selves and cultural identities within the participatory action research process: which we feel to be a key concern for the development of an emancipatory DS. We conclude that recognising the radical humanist element of participatory action research (PAR) permits us to navigate an enabling journey for disability research.