Disability Studies Today

Disability Studies Today

Edited by

Colin Barnes, Mike 0/iver and Len Barton

polity

Copyright :,t) this collection Polity Press 2002 First published in 2002 by Polity Press in association with Blackwell Publishers Ltd, a Blackwell Publishing Compa ny. Reprinted in 1008

Editorial office: Polity Press 6 5 Bridge Street Cambridge CB2 1 UR, UK

Marketing and production: Blackwel\ Publishers Ltd 1 08 Cowley Road Oxford OX4 lJF, UK

Published in the USA by

Blackwell Publishers Inc. 350 Main Street Maiden, MA 0 2 1 4 8, USA All rights reserved. Except for the quotation of short passages for the purposes of criticism and review, no part of this pu blication may be reprod uced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmirted, in any form or by any means, electron ic, mech­ anical, phytocopying, recording or otherwise, w ithout the prior permission of the publisher. Except in the United States of America, this book is sold subject to the condition that it shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, re-sold, hi red o u t , or otherwise circulated without the publisher's prior consent in any fo rm of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a simi l a r condition including this condition bei ng imposed on the subsequent purchaser. A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Li bra ry.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Disability studies today I edited by Colin Ba rnes, Mike Oli ver, and Len Barton. p.

cm.

Includes bi bliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-7456-2656-7 (hc)-ISBN 978-0-74 56-2657-4 (pb) 1. Disability studies. 2. Sociology of disability. 3 . People with disab il ities I. Barnes, Colin. Il. Oliver, Mike. Ill. Barton, Len .

HV 1 56 8.2 0595 2002 305.9'081 6-dc2 1

200200 1 6 6 8

Typeset in 1 0 on 1 2 pt Sabon by Kolam Information Services Pvt Ltd., Pondicherry, India Printed in the Uni ted States by Odyssey Press Inc., Conic, New Hampshir� This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Contents

Contributors 1

Introduction Colin Barnes, Mike Oliver and Len Barton

2

American Pragmatism, Sociology and the Development of Disability Studies

VII

18

Gary L. Albrecht

3

Di s abi l it y Theory: Key Ideas, Issues and Thinkers

Carol Thomas

38

4

Disability and the Body Bill Hughes

5

Theorizing Divisions and Hierarchies: Towards a Commonality or Diversity? Ayesha Vernon and John Swain

77

History, Power and Identit y

98

6

58

Anne Borsay

7

Work, Disability, Disabled People and European Social Theory

120

Paul Ab berley 8

S hoot i ng for the Moon: Politics and Disability at the Begi nning of the Twenty-First Ce ntu r y Phi{ Lee

139

VI

9

Contents Academic Debates and Political Advocacy: The US D i sability Movement Harlan Hah n

10

Globalization and Disa bility Chris Holden and

11

12 13

Peter Beresford

Disability, Citizensh ip and Rights in a Changing World Marcia H. Rioux

1 •2 t •O

20

Emancipatory Disability Researc h

z;s

D isability, the Academy and the Inclusive Society Colin B a rn es , Mike 0/iver a"d Len Barton

2 '0

Geof Mercer

Index

2t l

Contributors

Paul Abberley is Tutor I Counsellor for the Open University, Milton Keynes, working in South Devon, England. Gary L. Albrecht is Professor of Public Health, Disability and Human Development at the University of Illinois at Chicago, United States of America. Colin Bames is Professor of Disability Studies at the Centre for Disability Studies, Department of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Leeds, England.

Len Barton is Professor of Inclusive Education at the Institute of Educa­ tion, University of London, England. Peter Beresford is Professor of Social Policy and Director of the Centre for Citizen Participation at Brunei University, England.

Anne Borsay is Reader in the Department of History at the University of Wales, Lampeter, Ceredigion, United Kingdom. Harlan Hahn gained his Ph.D. in Political Science in 1 964, M.S. in Rehabilitation in 1 983, and has published over a hundred journal

articles and seven books in the United States of America.

Chris Holden is a lecturer in Social Policy at Brunei University, England,

with research interests in the political economy of the welfare state and globalization.

vm

Contributors

Bill Hughes is Head of t he D i vision of S oc i o l o g y and Soc i a l Policy,

Gl a sgow Caledonian University, G la s go w, Sc o t l a nd .

Phil Lee is Head of the Centre for St ud i es in the S oci a l Sc i en c es ;lt Edge Hill College (Associ ate Col lege of the Uni versity of Lancaste r ) , Orms­ kirk, E ngla nd . Geof Mercer is Senior Lecturer i n th e Department of Sociology and Soc i a l Policy, Un i ve r s ity of Leeds, England. Mike Oliver i s Professor o f D isab i lity Studies in the School of Social Scienc e s a t the University of G reen wic h , England. Marcia H. Rioux i s Professor and Ch a i r of the S ch ool of H e a l t h Policy and M a n a ge m e n t at York U n ive rsi ty, Toronto, Canada. John Swain is Pro fe s so r of D i s a b il i t y and I n c l u sio n in th e School of He a l t h , Soc i a l Work a nd Education at t h e University of Nort h u m bria

in Newcastle, England.

Carol Thomas is Senior Lec t urer in Applied S oc i a l Science in the Depart­ me n t of A pp li ed Social Science at the University of L a nc as t e r, England. Ayesha Vernon is Senior Le c t u re r and Senior Research Fellow i n D i sabil­ ity Studies in t h e School of Health, Social Work and Education a t the University of North u m bria in Newcastle, En gland .

1 Introduction

Colin Barnes, Mike 0/iver and Len Barton

Over recent years the re has been an unprecedented upsurge of interest in the general area of disability amongst social scientists i n universities and col l eges across the world . There a re now 'disa bility studies' courses and spec ia l ist journal s in the United States and Canada ( Albrecht et al., 2001 ) , Britain (Barton and Ol i ver 1997), and Australia and New Zealand ( Sullivan and Muntford 1998). There are a lso networks of scholars studying disa bility in the Nordic countries (Tideman 1999) and throughout Europe ( van Oorschot and Hvinden 2001 ) . This has been accompanied by an increasi ngly expansive l iteratu re from a variety of perspectives. Recent examples include cultural studies ( Mitchell and Snyder 2001 ), de v elo pment studies ( Stone 1999), geography (Glee­ son 1999), history (Longmore and Umansky 200 1 ) , philosophy (Wendell 1996), social policy ( D rake 1999), social psychology (Marks 1999) and sociology ( Ba rnes et a l . , 1999). Perhaps i nevitably, with this heightened interest a number of important chal l enges and debates have eme rged which raise a number of important questions for all those interested in this newl y e m e rgent and increasingl y important field of enqu iry. This Reader a i ms to p rov ide an i ntroduction to, and an overview of, these concerns and controversies. Although the field is i n creasingl y inter­ dis c i pl i n a ry in nature, the emphasis is predominantly a sociological one, as it is ou r contention that socio lo gica l theories and insights, whether intentiona lly or otherw ise, ha v e and can continue to p l a y a crucial role in the development of disabil ity studies. Altho ugh the focus is primari ly on theoretica l innovation and advancement, the arguments p resented here

2

Colin Barnes, Mike 0/iver and Len Barton

have important politi c al and policy impl ications for both di s a h lcd a11d

non - di sa bled people.

Disa bil it y studies, like ethnic, women's, and gay and lesbian stud ies, has developed from a position of engagement and a cti v i s m rather tha n one of detachme nt . Thus, as editors, we have s o ught contributors who cou l d write from such a position. This is because it is o ur fi rm (.;Onv iction that this enhances, rather than detracts from , the q u al i ty o f the i r contr i­ butions, and that the dia logue within these chapters w i l l provide yer fu rther stimulus fo r the future dev e l op m e n t of disabi lity stud ies.

Background The incre a sed i nterest in d i sab il it y in the ac a demy should not be su rpris­ ing, given that there is now a growi ng recognition that it raises a n u m ber of i mpo rta nt theoretica l a nd e m pirical questions at both the indi vidual and the structural level that are not easi l y answered with reference to est a bl i shed w i s d o m . D isabi l ity is b o t h a common p e r s on a l e x pe r ience and a g lobal phen o m e non , with wi de s p read economic, cultural and political implicati on s for society as a whole. Pe o ple with accredited impai r me nt s have existed since the dawn of time, and have had a pres­ ence in all societies. Recent esti mates suggest that the re are around 8.2 million d isa bled people in B r i ta i n, 50 m i l l i o n i n the European Union and 5 00 m illion wo rldw i d e . Moreover, these figures a re set to rise d ra m ati c a l ly over the coming decades, both i n the rich, ' deve l oped ' nations of the m i n or ity world and in the poorer, 'developi ng' c o u n t r i es of the m a j o r it y world ( IDF 1 99 8 ) . 1n rich an d poor countries alike, disabled people a re amongst the poorest of t he poor ( Coleridge 1 993: Stone 1 9 99: WHO 2 00 1 ), which r a i ses a number of issu es for politicians and pol i c y makers a t a l l levels and in a l l states. Since its politicization in the 1 960s by d i sa b i lity activists and d is a bil ity organizations across the world, disability has beco m e a n i nc reas i ngly i mportant issue for politicians and policy makers at b o t h the national a n d the international levels. Many n a ti on a l governments now have some form of anti-discrim ination law or policy to secure the equal rights of disa bled pe opl e . Ea rl y examples i nclu de Britain's 1 970 Ch ron i ca l l y Sick and Disabled Person 's Act a n d the American 1 973 Rehabilitation Act. Although relati ve ly ineffective, both promoted i mp r ove d environmental access and the developme nt of more c om pre h e n si ve services for disa bled people. The latter incl uded the histo ri c Section 504 w hi c h prohi bited discrimi nation against disabled people in fede ral l y funded program mes.

Introduction

3

Government responsibility for securing equal rights for disabled people was formally recognized at the international level by the United Nations in 1 981, the UN's Inte rnational Yea r of Disa bled People . The following year the UN General Assem bly adopted by consensus a 'World Programme of Action Concerning Disabled Persons', outlining a globa l strategy o n the prevention o f disability and the real ization o f the full potential of disa bled people. The next ten years were designated 'The UN Decade of Disabled Persons'. Between 1990 and 1993 member states in close colla boration with i nternational disabled peoples' organizations devel oped 'The Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Person s with D i sa bilities'. There are twenty-nvo Standard Rules covering medical and community- based services and facilities . The Rules were formally adopted by the UN in 1993 (WHO, 2001 ). The coming of disability studies Prior to the 1980s, one or two notable exceptions a side, academic interest in disabil ity was confined almost exclusively to conventional, individual i stic medical explanations, and even where others had become involved, they tended to reproduce disabi lity u ncritically within these frameworks. A classic exemplar i s found in the work of the influential American functionalist sociologist Talcott Pa rsons ( 1 951 ) , which centred on medicine as a mechanism of socia l integrati on and control. Since then various 'illness' perspectives have predominated in American sociology in particular. Initi a l ly, Parsons's (1951) interpretation of sickness as a social status and the rights and responsibilities assoc iated with the 'sick role' exerted a considerable i nfluence within sociology throughout the world. Subsequently, this work was supplemented by va rious interactionist and interpretive perspectives. For Parsons sickness, whether s hort or long term, is a deviation from the norm . Consequently the sociological analysis of the social responses to disab i l i ry became largely the preserve of soc iologists i nterested in the reaction to and m anagement of asc ribed social deviance. One nota ble exam ple is Erving Goffman's ( 1968) account of the i nteractions between the 'normal' and 'abnormal' entitled Stigma. Duri n g the fol lowing decade particular a ttention was pa id to the social construction of 'mental i l lness'. Examples include Thomas Scheff (1966) and D. L. Rosenhan ( 1 9 75 ) . Around the same time a psychoanalyst, Thomas Szasz ( 1 96 1 ) , had denied the very existence of mental illness, the validity of psychiatry as a legitimate medical discipl ine, and the reha bilitation potential of psychiatric hospita ls. For Szasz, the term 'menta l i llness' was a substitute

4

Colin Barnes,

Mike

Oliver and Len Barton

for a multitude of problems of li ving. The idea that menta l i l l ness an d other forms of ascri bed social deviance a re little more t h a n soci a l co n ­ structs gene rated by an i n c r easi n g l y dominant, mora listic soci a l o rde r was given a further boost by the writi ngs of the French p h i loso p h e r Michel Foucault ( 1 975, 1 979). Foucau lt's w ork was pa r ti ..:u l a r ly i nfluen­ tial on the development of postmodern thi n k i ng i n a varie ty of fie lds, i nc ludin g d isabi lity s t u dies, during the 1 990s, a s we shall sec i n s e v e ra l of the contri butions to this book. However, within sociology interest in the genera l area of 'disa bi l ity' inc r ease d during the late 1 960s and 1 970s with t h e p u h l i cat ion i n the United States of Robert Sc ott s The Making o f Blind Men ( 1 96 9 ) and Gary Albrecht's edited collection Th e Sociology of Physica l D isab il­ ity and R ehabilitat ion ( 1 976 ) and in Brit a i n of Mildred Blaxtcr's The Meaning of Disability ( 1 976 ) and Peter Townsend 's Pouerty in the United K ingdom ( 1 979 ) . But whilst each of these studies drew a t te ntio n to the va rious economic and social con se q uen c e s of the ascr i ption of a conventional 'disabled' identity, none made an y seri o us a tte m p t t o q u es­ tion its ideo log ic a l underpinnings: what has variou sly been called the 'individual', 'medical' or ' pe r so n a l tragedy' model of disabil ity. In sum, while this work recognized the significance of economic, socia l an d cultural factors in the production of disability, the causes of the wide­ spread economic and soci al deprivation encountered by disa bled people were located within the i n d i vid u a l and their i mpa i rment . The th eoretica l insights that had been applied to the concept of men tal i l lness w ere n ever extended to add ress other impairments, particularly p h ys i c a l di sa bi lity '. The challenge to orthodox views came not from w i t hi n th e aca d e m y but from disabled people themsel ves. Although the origins of politic a l activism amongst people with accredited impairments can be t r ac ed b a c k to the ni neteenth century ( Campbell and Oliver 1 996; Lo ngm ore an d Umansk y 200 1 ) , it escalated significantly during the 1 96 0 s and 1 9 7 0s . Inspired by the pol itica l and soc ial upheavals of th e perio d, d i s a ble d p eople b eg a n to organize c olle ct i vely in i ncreasi ngl y large n um bers to protest against t he i r incarcera tion in re s iden t i a l institutions, the i r poverry and the discrimination they encountered . The pattern is de m onstrated across the United States, Canada and various cou ntri es throughou t Eur ope Notable early examples i nc lude t he Am e r ica n In dependent Living Movement and the Swedish Self Advocacy Movement, as well as the formation of The D isablement Inc o m e G r ou p ( D I G ) a nd th e U nion of the Physical ly Impaired Against Segregation (UPIAS) in Bri tain ( Camp­ bell and Oliver 1 9 96 ) . But the British e xperience i s especially important, si nce i t g ene ra ted a r a d ical and controver sial new a pp r oach to th e ory and p r ac ti ce now '

'

.

Introduction

5

generally referred to as 'the social model of disability'. Here the activities of grass roots organizat ions controlled and run by disabled people, such as the UPIAS and the Liberation Network of People with Disabilities, are especially important. These and similar organizations provided the fertile grou nd in which disa bled activists could explore and reconfigure the whole notion of d isa bili t y. These 'organic intellectuals' (Gramsci 1971) produced an i mpressive body of work, the impact of which is only now being fully appreciated. Key texts include Paul Hunt's edited collection of disabled people's narratives entitled Stigma: The Experience of Disability (1966), UPIAS's Fundamental Principles of Disability ( 1976), Vie Finkel­ stein's Attitudes and D isa bled People (1980), Alan Sutherla nd's Disabled We Stand (1981 ), Mike Oliver's Social Work with Disabled People (1983) and The Politics of Disablement ( 1990). Drawing im p lici tl y, if not explicitly, on bo th personal experience and soc i olog ical insights, this l iterature con stitutes a direct challenge to con­ ventional thinking and practice on disabil i ty. For examp le , although not a sociologist, Paul Hunt, a resident in a residential home for 'physically d isabled people' during the 1950s and 1960s, 'read a lot to s upp le me nt his curta iled education' and was 'especially interested in the social and psychological aspects of disablement' (Hunt 1966: 144 ) . Moreover, Fin­ kelstein's early work is heavily i nfluenced by the writings of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels (see Feuer 1969). As noted earlier, traditional ap· proaches centred almost exclusively on individual li m it ations , whether real or i magined, as the princ i pal cause of the m u l tiple deprivations encountered by disabled people. By contrast, the social interpretation of disability argues that peop le with accredited or perceived impa ir· ments, regardless of cause, a re disa bled by society's fai l ure to accommo· date their needs . This approach does not deny the signi ficance of impairment in disabled people's lives, but concentrates i nstead on the various ba rriers, economic, political and social, constructed on top of impairment. Thus 'disability' is not a product of individua l failings, but is socially created; explanations of its c hanging cha racter are found in the organization and structures of society. Rather than id en tif ying disability as a n individual li mitation, the s ocial model identifies society as the problem, and looks to fundamental pol itical and cultural changes to generate solutions.

Disability studies and the academy None the less, although the emergence of the soc ial model of d isa bi li ty provided the ' big idea ' (Hasler 1993) for the mobi lization of disa bled

6

Colin Barnes, Mike 0/iver and Len Barton

people across the UK duri ng the 1 9 80s and 1 9 90s, it was slow to find acceptance in sociology departments in British un iversities. T h i s is espe­ cially surprising given sociology's traditional focus on soci a l inequality and divisions associated with social class, gender and race. Studies of disabi l i ty have been typical l y situated within the context of 111 ed ical sociology and the sociology of health a nd illness courses where i nrerac­ tionist and phenomenological perspectives have preva iled. These have documented the impact and meaning of the onset of spcl ogy

i

0

;

O

277

soc ial security 25, 1 24, 1 64, 1 9 9 Social Sec urity Act, U S A 1 64 Social Security Administration 25 socia l su rveys 1 00 social work 1 86-7 society 3 1 , 66, 73, 99, 1 2 1 Society for Disability Studies 7 , 29 Sociological Abstracts 3 1 sociology: body 1 0- 1 1 , 45-6, 66; Ch icago school 9, 1 9-20, 24, 2 6 , 27; constructions of d isability 3 1 ; disabil ity 1 -2, 5-6, 5 3 , 1 69; disabil ity studies 25; functiona lism 1 24-5 ; history 1 1 - 1 2 , 9 8- 1 0 1 ; impairment 52, 6 0 , 73; methodol ogy 22-4, 99; phenomenologica l 7 1 ; postmodernism 259; pragma tism 22; soc ial surveys 1 00; see also medica l sociology sol idarity 84-5, 1 24, 1 25, 1 30 soma tic society 66, 73 South Africa 90, 1 8 3 , 1 8 7

Southeastern Community College v. Da11is 1 72

Spaargaren , G . 67 Spa llone, P. 73 special educational needs 1 55 , 240 Spencer, Herbert 99, 1 1 1 Spicker, P. 1 45 stakeholder groups 3 2 Stalker, Kirsten 24 1 , 24 3 The Sta ndard Rules on the Equ alization of O pportun ities for Persons with Disabil ities 3 Stanley, L. 234, 242 state: advanced capitalist soc ieties 1 92-3; and cha rity 1 04 ; citizenship 14; economic factors 2 1 9; individual 2 1 8 ; multinationals 205-6 ; rights 224; social policy 224-5 ; surve i l l a nce 69-70; see also nation states Steinberg, D. L. 73 steri lization , compu lsory 6 1 , 2 1 0, 2 1 3 , 2 1 5 , 2 1 6, 2 1 8 , 22 1 stigmatization 28, 60, 64, 1 25 Stiker, Henri-jacques 3 3

278

Index

Stone, Emma I , 2, 1 9 1 , 1 94, 233-4,

236 Stone, S. D . 73 Stopford, S . 200 Strange, S. 200 Strauss, Anselm 27 Stuart, 0. 8 1 su bjectivity 28, 4 5 6 , 235 Sullivan, M . 1 Sun Healthcare 2 0 1 -

Sunday Best - Why People Hate Prejudice against Disabilit'}'

( Radio 4 ) 1 43 surgical intervention 1 1 2-1 3 ; see also orthopaedic hospitals surveillance 69-70, 9 8 , 1 05-7, 1 08-1 1 ,

232

Sussman, M. 1 73 Sutherland, Alan 5 Swain, John: a ffirmative model 1 50; barriers 65; disabil ity arts 85; D isabling Ba"iers 7; research 240; social c h a n ge 1 1 ; socio-political dimension 1 6 8 Sweden 6 1 sym bolic interactionism 27, 30-1 Synnott, A. 62, 70, 73 Szasz, Thomas 3-4 Tabb, D . H . 1 83 tabs ( temporarily able-bodied ) 140- 1 , 158

Tamaris 20 1 Tavistock Institute 229 Taylor-Gooby, P. 1 40 , 1 43, 1 4 5 ,

146, 202 tenBroek, j acobus 1 72 Tenet Healthcare Corporation 20 1 testicular cancer 1 5 8 testimonies 1 1 4-15 Tharcherism 141 Therborn, G. 1 4 8 Third Way 1 4 1 Thomas, Carol 4 6 ; capitalism 47 ; feminist materialism 69; feminists 48; impairment 44, 50-2; materialist feminism 90-1 ; outside-in approach 253-4; public/ private spheres 50; reconceptualization of disa b i lity 1 0;

restricted acti vity 5 1 ; social model 43 ; sociology of disability 5 3 Thomas, Keith 1 0 1 Thompson, E . P. 1 0 1 , 1 28 Thompson, G. 1 92, 200 Thompson, N. 77-8 , 8 9-90 Thompson, S. 1 46 Thomson, M . 1 04 Thornton, P. 1 3 0 Tideman, M. 1 Times Literary Supplement 1 0 1 Top liss, Eda 1 04, 1 06, 1 25 , 1 26 Tosh, j. 1 1 5 Touraine, Alain 58, 232 Townsend, Pete r 4 Traill, H. D. 1 0 0 tra nsformationa l politics 236-7 transformationalists/ globalization 1 92-3 transportation 165 Trevelyan, G . M. 1 00 Tronto, J. 1 3 3-4 true confessions 253 Truman, C. 254 Tulder, R. van 1 92 Turner, B. S. 45, 66, 67, 73 Uganda 1 83 , 1 87 Umansky, Lauri 1 , 4, 3 3 Unemployed Workers Movement 1 27 unemployment 1 97; disabled people 1 3 0- 1 ; gender differences 1 30-1 ; Hahn 1 65 ; O l iver 82; poverty 1 0 1 , 1 24, 1 32, 1 65; systemic failure 1 4 9 Union o f the Physically Impaired Against Segregation 4, 5, 39, 43,

64, 229; The Fundamental Principles of Disability 64 UNISON group 1 5 1 United Nations: citizenship 220;

Decade of D isabled Persons 3 ; Declaration on the Rights of Disabled Persons 220; Declaration on the Rights of Mentally Retarded Persons 220; International Covenant of Economic, Social and Political Rights 223-4; International Covenant on Civil and

Index Political Rights 223-4; International Year of Disa bled

People 3 ; The Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities 3; Universal Declaration on Human Rights 223; World Programme of Action Concerning Disabled Persons 3 ; World Summit on Social Development 1 94 United States of America: ADAPT 79, 1 6 7-8; Americans with Disabilities Act 1 3, 29, 30-1 , 1 52, 1 6 3 , 1 7 1 , 1 8 1 , 1 85, 222: anti-discrimination legislation 1 66, 1 72; APTA 1 6 7-8; Arrears Act ( 1 879) 1 64; capitalism 32; census 24; civil rights 64; Civil R i gh ts Act 1 65-6; Civil Rights Restoration Act 1 85 ; Civil War 1 64, 1 84; democracy 32; Department of Health and Human Services 1 8 1 ; Disability Discrimi nation Act 1 23, 1 3 9, 1 52, 1 5 3-4, 1 5 8 ; Disability Rights Ed ucation and Defense Fund 1 67; disa b i l ity s t u d ies 7-8; e ugenics 6 1 -2 ; exceptionalism 3 3 ; Health, Ed ucation and Welfare De pa rtment 1 66; Independent Living Movement 9- 1 0; indiv idu a l i sm 32; managed care 32; pragmatism 1 9- 2 0, 20- 1 ; Public Health Service 24 ; Rehabilitation Act ( 1 973 ) 2-3, 1 65, 1 70, 1 7 1 , 1 72, 1 8 1 , 1 85 ; Revol utionary army 1 64 ; Socia l Secu rity Act 1 64; survey research 9; wnrkers' compensation laws 1 64-5 , 1 84 universa lism 2 8 , 78, 99, 1 3 3, 1 45, 1 46-7 u n i ver s i t y see academy

uti litarianism 1 79, 1 80, 1 86

validation 243 Verbrugge,

loi s 1 8

\"ernon, Ayesh a : di fference 48; disc r i m i nation 79, 83; multiple

ident ities

88;

oppression 78-9, 8 1 ,

279

84, 93; researchers 243, 244; social c h a nge 1 1 veterans 1 84, 1 85 Veterans Administration 25, 29 Vincent, D. 1 08 violation of rights 223 visually impaired people 70-1 , 8 3 , 1 05-6 Vocational Rehabilitation Administration 2 9 voluntary organizations 203

wage levels 1 0 1 , 1 9 7 Walker, A. 121 Walker, C. 1 2 1 Wallcraft, ]an 2 3 5 Walmsley, ]. 88, 2 4 1 war casualties 1 09 Ward, L. 2 3 9, 24 0 , 24 1 , 243 Warmsley, J. 48 Warren, J . 99, 1 0 1 wartime, disabled workers 1 65, 1 84-5 Watson, F. I l l , 1 1 2 Watson, N. 144, 1 50 Weber, Max 27 welfare: disability studies 54; discrimination 1 54-5 ; globalization 1 3 , 1 4, 1 9 1 , 1 96 ; New labour 1 2 1 ; Oliver 1 9 5 ; paternalism 2 14 ; policies 32, 1 40, 1 8 5, 1 95 ; power relations 1 3 2-3; US studies 26 welfare benefits 1 24, 22 1 ; disabled living allowance 1 34; incapacity rule 1 98, 221 ; mobility allowances 1 3 6; social security 25, 1 24, 1 64, 1 99 Welsch, W. 73 Welsh, Carson, Anderson and Stowe 20 1 -2 Wendel l, S. 1 , 50 West, Come! 20, 26 Westergaard, J. 1 4 1 Westminster Health Care 20 1 wheelchair user 70-1 , 1 5 0 Wheen, Francis 1 4 1 White, Maurice 1 06, 1 1 2 White House Conference on Handicapped Individuals 7

280

In dex

Williams, A. 202 Williams, F. 86, 8 8-9, 9 1 , 145, 1 5 2 Wil liams, G. 6, 33, 44 Williams, Robbie 1 5 8 Williams, Simon 3 3 , 45-6 , 5 9 , 66, 67 Wilson, A. 99, 1 00 Wilson, William 26-7 Wise, S. 234, 242 women's movement 25 3-4 Wood, B. 1 9 8 Wood, Philip 4 1 Wood, Richard 85 Woodill, G . 239 work: age 1 56; care work 1 3 3-4; disabil ity 1 63-4; identity 1 32; inclusion 1 20, 1 33 , 1 35 ; migrants 1 3 2; social exclusion 206; social integrationist discourse 1 36 ; see also employment; labour market work ethic 1 03-4, 1 97 worker control 204 workers' compensation laws 1 64-5, 1 84 workhouses 1 04, 1 64

World Bank 26, 1 79-8 1 , 1 9 8 , 203 World Development Movement 1 90 World Federation of the Deaf 1 94 World Health Organization: hea lth definition 1 78 ; ICIDH 26, 41 -3, 1 75; WHOQOL 1 75 World Programme of Action Concerning D isabled Persons 3 World Summit on Social Development 1 94 World Trade O rganization 1 9 8 Wright, S. 1 05 Yelin, Edward H. 32 Yoshida, K . 7, 2 5 3 Young, D. A. 1 1 6 Young, I. 1 5 1 Zames, Frieda 33 Zarb, Gerry 140, 236, 238, 239, 240, 24 1 Zola, lrving K. 7, 1 8, 28, 3 1 Zubrow, E. 2 1 8