Disability as Human Variation: Implications for Policy

Abstract

The impact of any disability policy depends on the conceptual model of disability upon which that policy rests. For the past quarter century of disability policymaking, culminating in the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the dominant paradigm of disability has been a minority group model. That model identifies discrimination as the primary barrier facing people with disabilities in their desire for full social participation, and it proposes civil rights strategies as the proper policy response to that barrier. An alternative model of disability based on the concept of human variation is proposed that implies additional strategies for achieving the goal of integration of people with disabilities. The utility of a human variation model is illustrated by its application to the issue of access to employment.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

1. Harlan Hahn , “Toward a Politics of Disability: Definitions, Disciplines, and Policies,” Social Science Journal, 4:93 (1985).

2. Jacobus tenBroek , “The Right to Live in the World: The Disabled in the Law of Torts,” California Law Review, 54:841-919 (1966).

3. Constantina Safilios-Rothschild , The Sociology and Social Psychology of Disability and Rehabilitation (New York: Random House, 1970), p. 110.

4. John Gliedman and William Roth , The Unexpected Minority: Handicapped Children in America (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1980), p. 4.

Jane West , ed., The Americans with Disabilities Act: From Policy to Practice (New York: Milbank Memorial Fund, 1991).

6. See, for example, Louis Harris and Associates , The ICD Survey of Disabled Americans: Bringing Disabled Americans into the Mainstream (New York: International Center for the Disabled, 1986).

7. See, for example, W. Johnson and J. Lambrinos , “Wage Discrimination Against Handicapped Men and Women,” Journal of Human Resources, 20(2):264-277 (1986).

8. Edward H. Yelin , Disability and the Displaced Worker (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1992), p. 131.

9. Ibid., pp. 131, 151.

10.

10. Walter Y. Oi , “Disability and a Workfare-Welfare Dilemma,” in Disability and Work: Incentives, Rights, and Opportunities, ed. Carolyn L. Weaver (Washington, DC: AEI Press, 1991), p. 31.

11.

11. Yelin , Disability and the Displaced Worker, p. 153.

12.

12. Paul C. Higgins , Making Disability: Exploring the Social Transformation of Human Variation (Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas, 1992).

13.

13. Irving Kenneth Zola , “Disability Statistics, What We Count and What It Tells Us: A Personal and Political Analysis,” Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 4(2): 9-39 (1993).

14.

14. Higgins , Making Disability.

15.

15. Irving Kenneth Zola , “Toward the Necessary Universalizing of a Disability Policy,” Milbank Quarterly, 67(supp. 2, pt. 2):401-428 (1989).

16.

16. James G. March and Herbert A. Simon , Organizations (New York: John Wiley, 1958).