2.
Theories of “Disability”
Demographics of “Disability”
Social Work and “Disability”
Ettiquette of “Disability”
Working with “Disability”
3.
Theories of “Disability”
The various models for understanding and defining
“disability” are grounded in different traditions.
One tradition in the United States is to view the concept of
“disability” through a morally based model. Judeo-Christian values
have strongly influenced the portrayal of people with “disabilities” by
suggesting not only that these individuals are being punished for past
wrong doing, but also implying that they are the cause of their
“disability”.
This tradition is closely linked to ancient Greek and Roman
cultures, in which parents often abandoned “disabled” or “deformed”
children to die (Pardeck, 2002).
4.
The medical model, which emerged in the early 20th century,
is grounded in the moral model, and also shares the belief
that people with “disabilities” are flawed and must be fixed.
• The medical model obscures this view under the auspices
of science, the moral model under theology.
• The medical model sees people with “disabilities” as
having biological inadequacies; the moral sees them as
having spiritual flaws.
Theories of “Disability”
5.
6.
In contrast to the medical and moral models, the
social/minority model sees “disability” as a socially constructed
category much like race or gender. Therefore, the limitations of
“disability” are created by society - not the individual.
In simple terms, it is not the inability to walk that prevents
a person with a “disability” from entering a building unaided but
the existence of stairs that are inaccessible to a wheelchair-user
and the absence of a wheelchair ramp or/and an elevator.
Theories of “Disability”
7.
8.
Demographics of “Disability”
According to Degener (1995), more than 500 million
people, or 10% of the world’s population, suffer from some
type of “disability”. In the majority of countries, this means
that 1 out of 10 persons has a physical, mental, or sensory
impairment, and at least 25% of the entire population is
adversely affected by the presence of “disability”. In 2001,
the U.S. Census Bureau reported that 53 million people
(nearly 20% of the nation’s population) have some level of
“disability” and that 33 million (nearly 14% of the
population) have a severe “disability” (National
Association of Social Workers [NASW], 2009).
9. “Since a sixth of the nation’s
population has some form of
disability, disability impacts
practically every family”
- former Rep. Tony Coelho
(D – Cali.)
10.
Demographics of “Disability”
Americans with “disabilities” are the largest,
poorest, least employed, and least educated minority in
America (Griffin, 1991). Their experience has largely
been one of isolation, segregation, and discrimination.
They have been described as diseased, deformed,
abnormal, and undesirable.
Throughout the majority of the history of the
United States discrimination against people with
“disabilities” was socially, morally, and legally
acceptable.
11.
“Disability” → Poverty
Throughout the world the “disabled” constitute a disproportionate
number of the poor. The World Bank (1999) points out that one in five of the
world’s poorest individuals are “disabled” (Issac, et.al, 2010).
Individuals with “disabilities” are often excluded from the labor
market. Fears of increased costs, inflexibility in considering necessary
accommodations, and outright prejudice, all contribute to an artificially
small job market for people with “disabilities”. Even when included, people
with “disabilities” often work fewer hours and in lower-paying or lower-
skilled positions.
In some instances, individuals with “disabilities” are unable to
work in the competitive marketplace. For those who are so “disabled” that
competitive work is an impossibility, Social Security Disability Insurance
and Supplemental Security Income are most often relied upon. However,
federal benefits do not provide a living wage, making poverty an
inevitability.
12. Poverty almost necessarily leads to insufficient nutrition, sub-standard or
crowded housing, and inadequate physical and mental healthcare.
These factors alone or in combination lead to an increased risk of
impairment in which individuals who live in poverty are likely to be food insecure
(defined as having limited or nutritionally inadequate food as a result of lack of
money or resources to gain access to it).
Recent medical studies have demonstrated a strong association between
children who are chronically food insecure and physical and mental health
problems. School aged children with severe hunger were more likely to have low
birth weights, chronic health problems, and stressful life events. They were also
more likely than non-hungry children to have developmental delays, emotional
problems including anxious and depressive symptoms, and learning disabilities.
Poverty → “Disability”
13.
14.
The extent to which people with “disabilities” are segregated also
contributes to their marginalization. Thousands with “disabilities” remain
institutionalized, unable to participate in society in ways that others take for
granted. For these individuals, voting, having a family, and working are
illusory promises. For other people with “disabilities” living in the
community, the array of options is similarly limited.
People with physical “disabilities” may only be able to access a
fraction of the housing that people without “disabilities” may access. People
with cognitive “disabilities” are often congregated in group housing, or
supervised apartments, where their only neighbors are others with similar
disabilities. Living in the community of one’s choosing—a basic American
right—thus has a different meaning for people with “disabilities” (Atkins &
Guisti, 2004).
“Disability” → Segregation
15.
According to a 2009 study by the U.S. Bureau of Labor,
employment percentages for persons without a
“disability” was 64.5 percent, but only 19.2 percent among
those with a “disability”.
The unemployment rate of people with a “disability” was
14.5 percent, higher than the rate for those with no
“disability”, which was 9.0 percent.
For all age groups, the employment - population ratio was
much lower for persons with a “disability” than for those
with no “disability”. However, across all age groups,
persons with a “disability” were much less likely to be
employed than those with no “disability”.
“Disability”→↑Unemployment
16.
Women and girls with “disabilities” are subjected to
double discrimination: “disability” bias as well as
sexism.
A variety of factors contribute to this situation:
the greater life expectancy of women
women with “disabilities” are more likely to be
unemployed; if employed, they receive considerably
lower wages than men with “disabilities”
women with “disabilities” have not been part of able-
bodied women’s increases in the paid labor force.
“Disability” and Gender
17.
Among major race and ethnicity groups, the
prevalence of a “disability” was higher for blacks
and whites than for Asians and Hispanics
In their study of “disability”, Devlieger and Albrecht
(2000) found that blacks have a higher percentage of
“disability” in the 15 – 64 year old range than others
(20.8% as compared to 17.7% of whites and 16.9% of
Latinos)
Moreover, results indicated that rates of blacks with
a severe “disability” is almost double that of whites
“Disability” and Race
18.
Social Work & “Disability”
The most relevant and important of any “disability” policy in the
United States is the Americans with Disabilities Act, passed in 1990.
The four goals of the ADA are:
to provide a national mandate to eliminate discrimination against
individuals with “disabilities”
to provide an enforceable standard addressing discrimination
to ensure that the federal government will play a central role in enforcing
those standards
and to involve congressional authority in order to address the major areas
of discrimination faced by people with “disabilities”
These goals seek to address the grievances of the target population of people
with “disabilities” by increasing their ability to fully and equally participate
in society and by decreasing unlawful and unjust discriminatory practices
and ideals.
19.
The goals of the ADA are almost identical to the
goals of social workers as quoted in the preamble of the
NASW code;
“Social workers seek to enhance the capacity of people
to address their own needs. Social workers also seek to
promote the responsiveness of organizations,
communities, and other social institutions to
individuals’ needs and social problems”.
(Social Work Speaks, 2009)
Social Work & “Disability”
21.
Rule 1: Ask before you help
Just because someone
has a “disability”, don’t
assume s/he needs help. If
the setting is accessible,
people with “disabilities”
can usually get around fine.
Adults with “disabilities”
want to be treated as
independent people. Offer
assistance only if the person
asks for it, or appears to
need it. And if s/he does
want help, ask how before
you act.
22.
Rule 2: Be sensitive about
physical contact
Some people with
“disabilities” may have
difficulties with balance.
Grabbing them—even if your
intention is to assist—could
knock them off balance. Avoid
patting a person on the head or
touching their wheelchair,
brace, scooter, service animal,
or cane. People with
“disabilities” consider their
equipment part of their
personal space.
23.
Rule 3: Think before you speak
Always speak directly to
the person with a “disability”, not to
their companion, aide or sign
language interpreter. Making small
talk with a person who has a
“disability” is great; just talk to them
as you would with anyone else.
Respect their privacy. If you
ask about their “disability”, s/he may
feel like you are treating him as a
“disability”, not as a human being.
(However, many people with
“disabilities” are comfortable with
children’s natural curiosity and do
not mind if a child asks them
questions.)
24.
Rule 4: Don’t make assumptions
People with
“disabilities” are the best judge
of what they can or cannot do.
Don’t make decisions for them
about participating in any
activity. Instead, make sure
your activity is accessible.
Depending on the
situation, it could be a violation
of the ADA to exclude people
because of a presumption about
their limitations.
25.
Rule 5: Respond graciously to
requests
When clients or fellow
employees who have a
“disability” ask for an
accommodation at your
business, it is not a complaint. It
shows they feel comfortable
enough in your establishment
to ask for what they need. And
if they get a positive response,
they will probably come back
again and tell their friends
about the good service they
received just like anyone else.
26.
“Disabilities” that may be
encountered
Mobility Impairment/
Wheelchair
Blind/Low Vision
Deaf/Hard of Hearing
Speech Impairment
Short/Tall Stature
Cerebral Palsy
Look Different
Epilepsy
Multiple Chemical
Sensitivity
Mental Illness
Respiratory Illness
HIV/AIDS
Learning Disabilities
Traumatic/Acquired
Brain Trauma
27.
Not all “disabilities” are apparent. A client may make a request or
act in a way that seems strange to you. That request or behavior may be
“disability”-related.
For example, you may give seemingly simple verbal directions to
someone, but the client asks you to write the information down. S/he may
have a learning “disability” that makes written communication easier for
her/him.
Or an apparently healthy person may ask to sit, rather than stand.
This person may be fatigued from a condition such as cancer, or may be feeling
the effects of medication.
Even though these “disabilities” are hidden, they are real.
Please respect the
person’s needs and requests whenever possible
Hidden “Disabilities”
28. Works Cited
American with Disabilities Act of 1990 (The). (1990). P.L.101 – 336, 105 Stat. 327. Retrieved September 22, 2010
from Thomas online database
Atkins, D. & Guisti, C. (2004). The Confluence of Poverty and Disability, in The Realities of Poverty in Delaware,
2003-2004. Dover: Delaware Housing Coalition
Bureau of Labor Statistics (2010). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor. Retrieved on October 7, 2010 from
the Statistical Abstract of the United States online database
Degener, T. (1995). Human rights and disabled persons: Essays and relevant human rights instruments. The Hauge:
Martinus Nijhoff Publishers
Devlieger, P.J. & Albrecht, G.L. (2000). Your experience is not my experience. Journal of Disability Policy
Studies, 11:1, 51-60
Froschl, M., Rubin, E. & Sprung, B. (1999). Connecting Gender and Disability. WEEA Digest, WEEA Equity
Resource Center. Newton, MA: Retrieved on November 5, 2010 from
http://www2.edc.org/WomensEquity/pdffiles/disabdig.pdf
Griffin, R.D. (1991). The Disabilities Act. CQ Researcher, 1, 993-1016. Retrieved September 22, 2010 from CQ
Researcher online database
Issac, R., William, D.R., & Ravanan, M.P. (2010). Integrating people with disabilities: their right – our
responsibility. Disability and Society, 25:5, 627-630
Pardeck, J.T. (2002). Knowledge, tasks and strategies for teaching about persons with disabilities: implications
for social work education. Journal of Social Work in Disability & Rehabilitation, 1:2, 53-72. Retrieved September
22, 2010 from Social Work Abstracts online database
Social Work Speaks (8th ed.). (2009) Baltimore, MD: NASW Press
Disability Ettiquette (2008). United Spinal Association: Jackson Heights, NY: Retrieved May 12, 2011 from
http://www.unitedspinal.org/disability-etiquette/
