Updating the Social Model

Simone Aspis, Disabled Activist

It has been 30 years now since the Social Model of Disability has been developed, mainly by disabled people with physical impairments. During this time, there have been many attempts from Disabled people with different life experiences to offer constructive feedback on the models. However, with BCODP welcoming debate in their magazine, I hope for the first time such feedback will be welcomed to stimulate further debate. I must start by stressing that the Social Model of Disability is a good start with understanding Disabled peoples mistreatment based on barriers society creates. However, no single theory lasts forever or even just 30 years. My two areas here for debate, are the impairment definition and the recognition of cultural barriers.

The impairment definition has over the years been expanded to try and include all disabled peoples experiences. Impairment as a “loss of a function….” Implies that I have a loss of a bodily function. How can I have loss of a function, if I have never had it in the first place? For example, if I am blind from birth, I can never have lost the ability to see things with my eyes. Alternatively, I may have less of a visual function compared with non disabled people. Who defines whether I have less or a loss of a bodily function and how are such comparison made? Nowhere is there a challenge of what is perceived to be defined as “normal”. Impairment is just a yard stick to measure our differences and label them as loss or less of a function like medical professionals may well do.

I would propose to have impairment incorporated with something which we as Disabled people are always talking about, valuing and accepting people’s differences.

"The body/Mind function must be perceived negatively different from some kind of preconceived sensory, physical, intellectual or psychological or genetic norms, which usually derive from some kind of standardised test."

This definition incorporates the impairment definition. Disabled people have always seen their bodies functioning differently, when being tested and compared with “standard” human functions, and that this difference is perceived by other people as being negative.

Of course there must be some kind of cut-off mark of who is and who is not disabled, and this can be derived by negative perceptions of bodily differences which arise from the standard medical and psychological test results, like what height and weight should children be at certain ages, what children should be able to do at certain ages and the alike. Certainly anyone with finger nails shorter than their friends would have difficulty demonstrating they are disabled because there is currently no standard medical test which negatively measures and classifies people’s different finger-nail lengths.

It isn’t just impairment definition which needs to be developed. We must also look at what we hope to achieve for Disabled people once the attitudinal, environmental and organisational barriers have been removed. We can’t all or want to be like non disabled people even if all the barriers have been removed. Disabled people with profound learning difficulties labels who may have the best available equipment and support would not mean they would be able to perform at non disabled peoples intellectual levels.

Indeed, the only main difference between Normalisation and Social Model of Disability is the former puts pressure upon individuals and the later puts the pressure on society to change so that we are able to participate in the community. What the Social Model of Disability needs to include are the cultural barriers, we encounter as Disabled people for our inclusion on our own terms. Such inclusion is not simply about sharing our lives with non disabled people and aspiring to their values. Simply, it’s not about disabled people just being supported to live independently, getting qualified and having the chances of undertaking meaningful paid-work. The social model fails to acknowledge that some Disabled people will always be economically inactive, will not be paid sufficient enough either through social security benefits or wages (because some skills are undervalued) to have meaningful choices in their lives. Many of us aren’t going to have shared experiences of providing for oneself with or without support, and being economically active in an ever increasingly competitive world.

The measurement of our success must not be on how well we are able to adapt (with appropriate support / equipment) to fit into this world. Our yard-stick must be how much we are able to change the world so that everyone including Disabled People is able to determine their own life-styles, and to be supported to live the lives we want and to have the financial means to have real choices.

© Copyright British Council of Disabled People 2002