File Name: social and medical model of disability .zip
Philosophers have always lived among people who could not see, walk, or hear; who had limited mobility, comprehension or longevity, or chronic illnesses of various sorts. And yet philosophical interest in these conditions was piecemeal and occasional until the past hundred or so years. But the treatment of disability as a subject of philosophical interest is relatively new. The resurgent political philosophy of the second half of the last century, preoccupied with eliminating or reducing unearned disadvantages, tended to treat disability as a primary source of those disadvantages, to be addressed with medical correction or government compensation. Somewhat later, social philosophers began to see disability as a source both of discrimination and oppression, and of group identity, akin to race or sex in these respects.
The purpose of this article is to launch a new conceptual design tool in rehabilitation engineering, technology, and Disability Studies, useful both as guidance and help for people with disabilities in analyzing their own functional aids, and as inspiration and meta-guidelines for designers. It is non-discriminating and classification-free and differs from a mere classification system like the International Classification of Functioning ICF. The origin of the tool is twofold: experiences of my own disability and of research in rehabilitation engineering. Neither the medical nor the social model of disability is satisfactory for rehabilitation engineering and design. The medical model oversimplifies disability as an individual characteristic and directs attention towards individual adjustments and means. The social model, on the other hand, directs attention towards ideological and political analysis, not towards practical everyday solutions for experienced functioning.
For too long people with disabilities have been treated as second-class citizens. They have repeatedly been bombarded by messages that they their bodies are defective, that they need to be fixed or cured, and that their inability to participate fully in society is because of them and their disability. Carol Gill at the Chicago Institute of Disability Research wrote a paper that strove to see how people with disabilities are seen by society, as well as how people with disabilities see themselves. Gill believes that there has been an overemphasis on the medical model of disability, which has kept people with disabilities from being able to fully participate in society. Following is a description of the five key differences between the two models. The medical model says that having a disability is negative whereas the social model says that having a disability is neutral.
Several models of defining disability have been developed to try to address the many types of disabilities. Models of disability provide a reference for society as programs and services, laws, regulations and structures are developed, which affect the lives of people living with a disability. Medical Model — The medical model describes disability as a consequence of a health condition, disease or caused by a trauma that can disrupt the functioning of a person in a physiological or cognitive way.
This model only looks at what is wrong with the individual rather than what the individual needs to be able to live a full and rewarding life. This model believes that the problem is with society and the way that it treats individuals with a disability. Yn y model hwn, credir bod yr anabledd yn broblem y mae angen ei datrys, hyd yn oed os nad yw'r unigolyn yn dioddef unrhyw boen neu anghysur. Dim ond ar yr hyn sydd o'i le ar yr unigolyn y mae'r model hwn yn edrych, yn hytrach na'r hyn sydd ei angen ar yr unigolyn i allu byw bywyd cyflawn a llawn boddhad. Lle y caiff y model meddygol ei ddefnyddio, disgwylir i'r unigolyn addasu, neu caiff ei gau allan. Yn y model hwn, credir mai cymdeithas a'r ffordd y mae'n trin unigolion ag anabledd yw'r broblem.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *