First the Medical Model, Then the Social Model, now the Political Model
November 15th, 2009I’ve written a lot about the medical vs. social model of disability, particularly in response to misunderstandings about the social model. For instance, I’ve talked about how nearsightedness or color blindness isn’t considered a disability, despite the fact that both are examples of eyes “lacking” some ability. This is because society decides what is a disability, and it’s not based upon medical opinion, but rather social stigma and opinion, as well as, in many cases, the availability of socially-acceptable accommodation (such as eye glasses). But that’s not what I’m writing about today (even though I did find a really cool site that will let you check your website/blog/image/whatever to see if people who are color blind could use it – see http://vischeck.com/ if you want to learn more).
Instead, I’m writing about a new, emerging model of disability – the political model. In this model, the people who further a given person’s cause are disabled, everyone else is not. So, for instance, an autistic who can talk, work, live with a spouse, raise kids, etc, may be autistic to one group for nothing more than political reasons, while being non-autistic from other groups for political reasons.
For example, in the realm of “Oh-My-God-My-Child-Is-So-Horribly-Broken and Autism-Must-Be-Eradicated-At-Any-Cost” groups, an autistic who works, has a spouse, talks, likes themself, or even uses the toilet would be considered “non-disabled” for political reasons. Simply put, the existence of such autistics is inconvenient.
It goes the other way, too: An Aspie Superiority supporter might decide that a person is non-autistic because the person in question can’t talk or work, don’t have a spouse, or hates themself. So they likely have some other condition, other than autism (certainly other than Asperger’s Autism, according to them!), something that “really is” horrible.
What’s my view? Well, I’m not ready to throw out the social model and replace it with the political model just quite yet. An “inconvenient truth” is not quite enough for me to strip away someone’s diagnosis.
I think you are way off beam hear, politics is in itself a subdomain of society, the ubernarrative remains the social model because the political model is constructed within that and relies upon social attitudes towards difference and disability to construct it’s own discourse of prejudice and oppression.
The only person that can decide whether or not a person has an ASD is a doctor. No one can “strip” anyone of an official diagnosis. A person or group can’t decide that someone doesn’t have a said diagnosis simply because their political views differ: that’s just ignorant.
I agree. I for one get as annoyed when I hear this political definition of disability coming from someone I usually agree with (eg. someone who advocates acceptance for autistics rather than cure), as when it comes from someone I disagree with. It’s not like the social/daily life consequences of autism (or any disability for that matter) are any different just because it suits some political cause better. Unfortunately it is possible that this political model of disability will affect the way the social model is approached.
Joel,
Your dishonest writing is harmful to all autistic people.
To be honest the last person who ought to have and in my mind has any jurisdiction over who is autistic or not is a Dr.
That whole notion is so “sick”
Do I have any diagnosis because a Dr has said so, or has been able to recognise it.
To whom does my neurological and physiological configuration belong.
There is a world and there was a world before there were words in it to describe.
Kev, Don’t like what is said? Call the person saying it a liar, whether or not there is any lying involved – at least that seems to be what is happening here!
This is your last warning here – personal attacks, against me or others are not allowed. Now if you want to substantiate something you say, with, say, evidence or reason, then you are most welcome here.
I wouldn’t assume that “Kev” is Kev Leitch, as the name above doesn’t contain a link. More likely some troublemaker, some troll.
I’m going to agree with Larry in that Doctors or Psychologists are not necessarily “the experts” we should rely on. They SHOULD have the tools to Dx autism, but I’ve heard too many stories from people who said their Doctors have told them they couldn’t possibly be autistic, because they could TALK! Such ignorance occurs everywhere.
I’m decidedly AGAINST anyone diagnosing OR undiagnosing anyone over the net. Just because someone knows one, or a few, autistic people doesn’t mean that they understand what it’s like across the spectrum.
Clay,
” I’ve heard too many stories from people who said their Doctors have told them they couldn’t possibly be autistic, because they could TALK! Such ignorance occurs everywhere.”
After having three children diagnosed with autism, I’ve been refused even the evaluation process because I am “too articulate” and “too educated”.
We also had a doctor tell us that our kids couldn’t be autistic, because all three of them met the qualifications. After the tests for fragile x came back negative, she claimed it must be learned, even though the each are on different “places” on the spectrum differently.
Doctors are the “experts” of the medical model of disability in a collective sense, but as individuals they are not infallible.
A diagnosis of autism isn’t an automatic diagnosis of disabililty. My son has autism and is re-evaluated every three or four years to determine the level of funcitoning or disability. Some autistic people can support themselves without supports, some cannot. Those who cannot are considered to be disabled. I think that is pretty much how it is with all of the different diagnoses out there. It is how well a person can take care of themselves that counts.
I tried to run vischeck on my blog and it took me to a phishing page – a page where they wanted me to log into blogger, but the url address was not a blogger address. I think people who are trying this are giving their passwords away.
I verified the link above – nowhere does it ask for a password, so I’m not sure where you are seeing it do the phishing. The only thing I can think of is that the website will *not* be logged into Blogger (unlike you, likely), as it is a new visitor session to your blog. So it will show the “log in to leave a comment” boxes, just like a visitor will see. It is not a phishing site, although I imagine some things may confuse it for one (the difference is that it is showing you the site, not providing scripts to capture the passwords, even on sites with password logins like Blogger comment pages).
friends and i have been talking a lot about a cultural model, i wonder if what you are getting here w/ political model is similar in idea.
i looked into a socio-cultural model of autism for my C. P. S. E. at Jyväskylä University of Applied Sciences.