On valuing impairment

Howard, Dana; Aas, Sean

doi:10.1007/s11098-018-1074-y

Cited by 12 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…13 For a discussion of the impact of restricted information on the reliability of individuals' choices and preferences see Begon (2018a). 14 Similar worries are raised by Campbell and Stramondo (2016), Wasserman (2018), and Howard andAas (2018: 1127). 15 Also see: Wasserman (2018: 254), Howard andAas (2018: 1115), Francis (2018).…”

Section: Barnes's Social Constructionist Approachmentioning

confidence: 72%

“…14 Similar worries are raised by Campbell and Stramondo (2016), Wasserman (2018), and Howard andAas (2018: 1127). 15 Also see: Wasserman (2018: 254), Howard andAas (2018: 1115), Francis (2018).…”

Section: Barnes's Social Constructionist Approachmentioning

confidence: 72%

“…Finally, the neutral approach provides a means of responding to a worry that might be raised about under-inclusiveness: if impairment is deficiency then those whose functioning cannot plausibly be described as deficient, such as some autistic persons, will not be considered disabled. One means of avoiding such exclusion is to allow that individuals may be disabled if they are merely perceived as, or treated as if, they are impaired [indeed, the ADA has taken this approach (see Francis 2018 for discussion), and for a defence of this position see Aas (2016) and Howard and Aas (2018)]. This move is unnecessary if impairment merely implies difference: these individuals straightforwardly count as impaired insofar as their functioning is atypical, and are disabled if they lack opportunities they are entitled to.…”

Section: What Disability Is Not 21 Disability and Impairmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…I believe these claims can best be refuted with a neutral account of impairment, though I cannot rehearse these arguments here (seeBegon (unpublished).) For further critiques of Barnes's view of impairment, seeHoward and Aas (2018) andFrancis (2018).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Disability: a justice-based account

Begon

2020

Philos Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most people have a clear sense of what they mean by disability, and have little trouble identifying conditions they consider disabling. Yet providing a clear and consistent definition of disability is far from straightforward. Standardly, disability is understood as the restriction in our abilities to perform tasks, as a result of an impairment of normal physical or cognitive human functioning (in combination with our social, political, and environmental context, and our resource share). However, which inabilities matter? We are all restricted by our bodies, and are all incapable of performing some tasks, but most of these inabilities are not considered disabilities. If, then, we are to avoid the category of disability becoming overly broad—and thus politically and practically useless—we need some way of picking out the specific inabilities that are disabling. I argue that our answer should be informed by an account of the opportunities individuals are entitled to be able to perform as a matter of justice. Thus, to be disabled is to have these opportunities restricted, and not to deviate from the species norm or lack any ability that might improve our well-being.

show abstract

Section: Barnes's Social Constructionist Approachmentioning

confidence: 72%

Section: Barnes's Social Constructionist Approachmentioning

confidence: 72%

Section: What Disability Is Not 21 Disability and Impairmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Disability: a justice-based account

Begon

2020

Philos Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… Note that ‘disability’ is used here in the social model's sense; thus, even those who deny that deafness involves biological dysfunction or ‘impairment’ can agree that it is perceived as such and therefore constructed as a ‘disability’; see Howard and Aas . …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%