rss
J Med Ethics 2008;34:26-27 doi:10.1136/jme.2006.019950
  • Ethics

The impairment/disability distinction: a response to Shakespeare

  1. S D Edwards
  1. S D Edwards, Centre for Philosophy, Humanities & Law in Healthcare, 7th Floor, Vivian Tower, Swansea University, Swansea SA2 8PP, UK; s.d.edwards{at}swansea.ac.uk
  • Received 9 January 2007
  • Revised 9 January 2007
  • Accepted 31 January 2007

Abstract

Tom Shakespeare’s important new book includes, among other topics, a persuasive critique of the social model of disability. A key component in his case against that model consists in an argument against the impairment/disability distinction as this is understood within the social model. The present paper focuses on the case Shakespeare makes against that distinction. Three arguments mounted by Shakespeare are summarised and responded to. It is argued that the responses adequately rebut Shakespeare’s case on this specific issue. Moreover, as the engagement with Shakespeare’s argument illustrates, his claim to employ a critical realist perspective appears to be in considerable tension with the case he offers against the impairment/disability distinction.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests: None.

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.