It’s been 40 years since the social model of disability emerged as an alternative way of thinking about disability rights.
The social model of disability says that people are disabled by the physical, social and attitudinal barriers they face in society. It is different to the medical model, which sees disability as a health problem in need of a cure.
A recent panel, hosted by the Melbourne Disability Institute and the University of Melbourne’s Diversity and Inclusion team, discussed whether it’s time to move on from the social model or whether it is still needed.
Moderated by Professor Anne Kavanagh, the panel featured professor of Indigenous disability health and wellbeing at the University of Technology Sydney, Dr Scott Avery; social worker and associate professor at Flinders University Lorna Hallahan; and disability advocate from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Professor Tom Shakespeare.
‘I think we should begin again’
Professor Shakespeare said the social model was not designed to explain disability. Rather, it said that people with disability face social exclusions on top of their condition, which adds to inequality.
“The danger comes when we think it explains everything – it does not,” he said.
“We need to understand the range of disability in order to understand the lives of disabled people.”
He said it is useful for removing barriers, but he believes disability is more complicated due to the intersection of society and a person’s impairments. Professor Shakespeare recommended revising the model to make it “fit for purpose” in the modern world.
“I think we should put it aside. I think we should begin again,” he said.
Taking it further
Dr Scott has designed a model of cultural inclusion for First Nations people with disability, through his narrative book Culture Is Inclusion which told the stories of disabled First Nations people.
He said from a rights perspective, the cultural inclusion model and the social model say the same thing, but in a different way.
Dr Scott said the First Nations side offers a relational approach, encouraging authorities to “get the relationship right with people with disability” as a starting point to dismantling barriers.
Associate Professor Hallahan said the social model has ten “bugbears”, including being too negative about the experiences of people with disability, being too rigid and having a lack of “attention to situation”.
“It’s too crude and too tidy a formula for a messy world,” she concluded.
But she added the social model has benefits too; and overall, Associate Professor Hallahan explained she wants to keep the social model, noting it needs – and has received – some changes over the years.
She said changes to the social mode should not just be seen as “tinkering” or “unnecessary elaborations”.
“They capture the web of narrative that forms our shared humanity and our common work for liberation and flourishing. All the expanded additional elements are key to a robust social theory framework that has the potential to critique our current social relations, inspire change and drive innovation,” Associate Professor Hallahan added.
Dr Scott said the social model carries the knowledge of past advocates and works in tandem with the medical model at times. Ongoing changes to the social model will reframe it to fit the needs of people with disability at that time and in that place, giving them a framework that will guide their generation and help them feel safe and secure in their identities and bodies.