Rethinking disability: world perspectives in culture and society

Rethinking Disability: World Perspectives in Culture and Society is a contemporary compendium on the sociology of disability, bringing together over 30 authors to share their expertise on a subject which affects people throughout the globe. The book is divided into five main sections, starting with ‘Disability Histories and Sociocultural Foundations’, then ‘(Re)presenting and Performing Disability’, ‘Local meets Global, Global meets Local’, ‘Constructing and Transitioning Through Pedagogy’ and ‘Transmodern, Transhuman and Posthuman Explorations’. The breadth and depth of this book is outstanding, exploring issues such as gender, sexuality, human rights, eugenics, ableism, privilege and feminism, all through the lens of disability culture. The result is that this book is bound to provide something of interest to every reader.

The introduction, written by the editors of the book, introduces the concept of disABILITY Mundus which is the worldwide, contemporary study of disability. The authors explain that the emphasis on the ability part of the word disability is because ability is what unifies people all around the world. It is difficult to summarise the meaning of the term succinctly as it is complex, encompassing aspects of anthropology, sociology, psychology, history and social policy. The first chapter explores this term further, explaining that the interpretation of disability is influenced by social and cultural factors and therefore it could be said that the ‘lives of individuals with disability are limited not so much by their specific type as by the social interpretation of that disability’ (Groce 1999, 756). It stands to reason, therefore, that disability studies need to be worldwide in order to incorporate cultural and social variation.

Barnartt’s chapter entitled ‘Role Theory and the Fluidity of Disability’ provides an interesting and important definition, stating that:

disability is not one state or condition that is similar for all people with a specific type of impairment. Rather, the degree of disability arises from the social situation in which the person exists at a given moment as well as other aspects of the physical and social environment. (47)

This distinction has implications for policy and practice because if each person who has a disability experiences that disability differently depending upon their sociocultural environment, then each person may require a different type of support and/or adaptations. This also means that definitions of disability need to be fluid as ‘disability is not a dichotomous state, in which one either has it or does not’ (47). This is of importance to individuals with chronic illnesses whose symptoms fluctuate or those with conditions which are less visible or obvious who have not previously fitted into a conventional definition of disability (Davis 2005). Barnartt argues that the roles which people inhabit also have an influence on the interaction between a person’s impairment and their environment. This builds upon the social model of disability (Oliver 1983), which suggests that disability is caused by barriers in society as opposed to the health of the individual.

‘Rethinking Disability as a Human Rights Issue’ written by Campos Pinto provides an interesting history about whether people with disabilities have their human rights upheld not only in legislation but also in policy and practice. The chapter describes the development of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2006), which is a ‘human rights instrument that fundamentally reaffirms that all persons with all types of disabilities must enjoy all human rights and freedoms on an equal basis with others’ (214; original emphases). Campos Pinto rightly points out that although the convention shied away from using sociopolitical terms such as oppression which many academics consider to be at the core of the social model of disability (Barnes 2008), it did acknowledge the social context of disability and defined disability as an ‘evolving concept’ which expanded its meaning and inclusivity. This chapter concludes that although the disability rights movement has achieved a lot and come a long way, it still has a long way to go before equality is achieved.

Many of the authors in Rethinking Disability use an academic tone whilst exploring complex theories but unfortunately this can at times overcomplicate and therefore overshadow the meaning. Whilst it is important to provide academic texts for educational purposes, this should ideally not be at the expense of potentially making it inaccessible to anyone who is not a scholar. Indeed Wolbring, in the chapter ‘Expanding Ableism: Taking down the Ghettoisation of Impact of Disability Studies Scholars’, acknowledges the difficulty of using academic language in disability studies and states that:

to serve disabled people as a scholar, the publication strategy would also have to include other venues of publication such as blogs and social networking sites in a more non-academic language given that the education of disabled people varies so much. (142)

Disability studies need to be objective and accessible in order to effectively contribute to policy and practice (Shakespeare 2015). Accessible writing ensures that complex information is communicated unambiguously to any audience, therefore avoiding ghettoisation. Readers of Disability and Society may be aware that its publishers, Taylor and Francis, provide ‘easy English summaries’ of some of their articles, which is an example of steps that can be taken in order to improve accessibility and reach a wider audience.

Rebecca Regler
Independent Scholar, Oxford, UK
[email protected]
© 2017 Rebecca Regler
https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2017.1414289