Resources search

This article aims to reorient thinking about the relationship between the long-standing social model of disability and the rapidly emerging human rights model. In particular, it contests the influential view that the latter develops and improves upon the former (the improvement thesis) and argues instead that the two models are complementary (the complementarity thesis). The article begins with a discursive analysis of relevant documents to investigate how each of the two models has been used in the crafting and monitoring of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. This highlights the increasing importance of the human rights model in this policy context. It also provides examples of the operation of the two models which inform the remainder of the discussion. We then critique the comparisons between the models which underpin the improvement thesis; and, drawing on Foucault’s technologies of power and Beckett and Campbell’s ‘oppositional device’ methodology, deepen and develop this comparative analysis. The result, we argue, is that the two models have different subjects and different functions. In the human rights context, their roles are complementary and supportive.

This article takes its starting point in the Nazi ideology as it appears in the writings of Adolf Hitler, and discusses how disability and the body can be understood in the context of Mein Kampf. The article underlines how disability and bodily infirmities, alongside race, featured significantly in Hitler’s demagogic message. Although the overall image of disability was related to a sense of threat – and a culture gone wrong – Mein Kampf also contains a mixed interpretation of disability as a phenomenon, in which different and opposing disability narratives took part in the construction and the image of the body as a national property.

Purpose: The social model of disability emphasises the identification and removal of barriers to the inclusion of persons with disabilities in mainstream society. The study examines issues associated with the exclusion of women with physical disabilities in Tamale, Ghana, and makes recommendations for the effective participation and inclusion of persons with disabilities, especially the women, in society.

Method: Data were gathered through in-depth individual interviews and focus group discussions. Purposive and snowball sampling were used to recruit 10 women with physical disabilities for the in-depth interviews. Purposive sampling was also used to recruit 14 representatives from government and civil society organisations for 2 multi-organisational focus groups. Using open coding and line-by-line analysis, themes and categories were identified. Themes that emerged from the focus groups and from the individual interviews were compared and contrasted to arrive at conclusions about the participation of women with physical disabilities in mainstream society.

Results: Study participants identified barriers (attitudinal, institutional, architectural, transportation, and information) and suggested methods to eradicate them and foster inclusion. At the same time they felt that it was equally important to change certain attitudes of persons with disabilities (ignorance about available resources, opportunities and potential, low levels of self-confidence, and negative reactions to societal attitudes) which contribute to their exclusion from society.

Conclusion: Advocacy interventions are recommended, which include public education, building relationships and mobilising the public for advocacy campaigns. Decision-makers need to be persuaded to make additional policies and/or enforce existing ones, to promote the inclusion and effective participation of persons with disabilities in society.