In this analysis, the authors explore the implications of changing classifications and definitional criteria for mental disability and physical disability. Much of this discussion is set against the background of the ideas that have come out of the social and political movements organized by individuals with disabilities. The first part of the article focuses on issues that may develop from increasing implementation of the “social model” of disability. The second part centers on the problems produced by the development of measures based on contrasting definitions. Finally, the authors examine the factors that might contribute to evaluations of the satisfaction of and opportunities for adults with disabilities living in the community.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Albrecht, G.L., & Devliger, P.J. (1999). The paradox of disability: High quality of life against all odds. Social Science and Medicine, 48, 12—16.
2.
Barnes, C. (1996). Theories of disability and the origins of the oppression of disabled people in western society. In L. Barton (Ed.), Disability and society: Emerging issues and insights (pp. 43—60). London: Longman.
3.
Bloch, F.S. (1992). Disability determination: The administrative process and the role of medical personnel. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
4.
Guinier, L. (1994). The tyranny of the majority: Fundamental fairness in representative democracy. New York: The Free Press.
5.
Guinier, L., & Torres, G. (2002). The miner's canary: Enlisting race, resisting power, transformingdemocracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
6.
Groce, N., Chamie, M., & Me, A. (1998). Measuring the quality of life: Rethinking the World Bank's disability adjusted life years. International Rehabilitation Research Review, 4(2), 12—16.
7.
Hahn, H. (1985). Toward a politics of disability: Definitions, disciplines, and policies. The Social Science Journal, 22(4), 87—105.
8.
Hahn, H. (1993). The political implications of disability definitions and data. Journal of DisabilityPolicy Studies, 4(2), 41—52.
9.
Hahn, H. (1996a). Antidiscrimination laws and social research on disability: The minority group perspective. The Law andBehavioral Sciences, 14, 1—19.
10.
Hahn, H. (1996b). Los Angeles and the future: Uprisings, identity, and new institutions. In M. Dear, G. Hess, & E. Schockman (Eds.), RethinkingLos Angeles (pp. 77—95). Newberry Park, CA: Sage.
11.
Hahn, H. (2000). Accommodations and the ADA: Unreasonable bias or biased reasoning?Berkeley Journal of Employment and Labor Law, 21(1), 166— 192.
12.
Hahn, H. (2001). Adjudication or empowerment: Contrasting experiences with a social model of disability. In L. Barton (Ed.), Disability, politics and the struggle for change (pp. 59—78). London: David Fulton .
13.
Hahn, H., & Hegamin, A.P. (2001). Assessing scientific measures of disability. Journal of DisabilityPolicy Studies, 12(2), 114—121.
14.
Hays, R., Hahn, H., & Marshall, G. (2002). Use of the SF-36 and other health-related quality of life measures to assess persons with disabilities. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 86, S1—S2.
15.
Hearings on H. R. 2273 before the Subcommittee on Employment Opportunities and the Selected Subcommittee on Education of the House Committee on Education and Labor, 101st Cong., 19—20 (testimony of Evan J. Kemp). (September 13, 1989).
16.
Marshaw, J.L. (1983). Bureaucratic justice: Managing Social Security disability claims. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
17.
Pfeiffer, D. (1998). The ICIDH and its need for revision. Disability and Society, 13, 503—523.
18.
Pincus, H.A., Kennedy, C., Simmons, S.J., Goldman, H.H., Sirovatka, P., & Sharfstein, S.S. (1991). Determining disability due to mental impairment: APA's evaluation of Social Security Administration guidelines. American Journal of Psychiatry,148, 1037—2043.
19.
Stone, D.A. (1984). The disabled state. Philadelphia : Temple University Press.
20.
Ustin, T.B., Bickenbach, J.E., Badley, E.M., & Chattedji, S. (1998). A reply to David Pfeiffer: “The ICIDH and its need for revision.” Disability and Society, 13, 829—831.
21.
Yelin, E.H. (1992). Disability and the displaced worker. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
