CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 148Disability Rights and RepresentationMedicine, History, and PhilosophyInclusion and Disability in Education and Sport

Changing the medical model of disability to the normalization model of disability: clarifying the past to create a new future direction

Open access
Zaks, Zosia·2024·Disability & Society
DOI 10.1080/09687599.2023.2255926
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The medical model of disability describes a widespread approach to disability common since the 1800s that views disabilities of all sorts as abnormalities that need to be cured or eradicated.Under the medical model of disability, medical care for disabled people has focused on making the bodies and brains of disabled people conform as closely as possible to society's idea of a normal person.This emphasis on normalization was and continues to be extremely harmful to disabled people.In this paper, I propose retroactively changing the term medical model of disability to normalization model of disability to avoid conflation with useful medical care and to highlight normalization as the quintessential harm of the model. Points of interest• Disability models are mental maps that shape all aspects of life for disabled people.• The medical model of disability has dominated societies for a long time.• The medical model sees disabilities as abnormal and tries to make disabled people conform to our idea of a normal body or brain.• Trying to make disabled people just like so-called normal people is very harmful and hurts disabled people.• In this article, the author suggests we change the name of the medical model of disability to the normalization model of disability so that everyone understands clearly just how harmful normalization is.• The author also suggests we change the name because disabled people might want medical care in some circumstances.Using the term 'medical model' can cause confusion because the medical model was and continues to be very bad, but not all medical care is bad.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09687599.2023.2255926

Cites

157 of 157 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Organisational responses to disability often focus on identifying and accommodating individual differences in relation to perceived workplace norms, rather than examining how workplace systems themselves are structured.

    “organisational responses to disability often focus on identifying and accommodating individual differences in relation to perceived workplace norms, rather than examining how workplace systems themselves are structured”

    From The system-level organisational design framework: a neuro-cognitive trait interaction approach to workplace inclusion for autistic people (2026) · cites this paper as Zaks, 2024

    The Abstract says that access to supports can require disabled people to document incapacity and abnormality. The ‘Social constructivism’ section shows how expectations about hours, breaks and physical demands can exclude workers with body and brain differences. These passages support the contrast between individual-focused responses and structural barriers, but do not establish that organisations often respond this way rather than examining their workplace systems. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

6 of the 163 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 13

  1. Andrews, E. E. 2020. Disability as Diversity: Developing Cultural Competence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  2. Asch, A. 1994. "The Human Genome Project and Disability Rights. " Disability Rag 15 (1): 12-15.
  3. S82937 · DOI
  4. Conyers, L. M. 2003. "Disability Culture: A Cultural Model of Disability. " Rehabilitation Education 17 (3): 139-154.
  5. Dahrendorf, R. 1969. "On the Origin of Social Inequality. " In W. T. Blackstone (ed.), The Concept of Equality, 96-114. Minneapolis, MN: Burgess.
  6. Durkheim, E. 1969. "Individualism and the Intellectuals (S. Lukes, Trans.). " Political Studies 17 (1): 14-30 (Original work published 1898). Education for All Handicapped Children Act, 20
  7. Gabbard, C. 2010. November 7. A life beyond reason. The Chronicle of Higher Education: The Chronicle Review. http://www.chronicle.com/article/a-life-beyond-reason/.
  8. Klein, J. M. 2012. "Compensating Victims of Forced Sterilization: Lessons from North Carolina. Journal of Law. " Medicine & Ethics 40 (2): 422-427.
  9. Oliver, M. 2004. "The Social Model in Action: If I Had a Hammer. " In C. Barnes and G. Mercer, Implementing the Social Model of Disability: Theory and Research, 18-31. Leeds, United Kingdom: The Disability Press.
  10. Parsons, T. 1951. The Social System. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
  11. Shakespeare, T. 2006. "The Social Model of Disability. " In The Disability Studies Reader, edit- ed by L. J. Davis, 214-221. London: Routledge.
  12. Washington, D.C.: The Autistic Press.
  13. Wendell, S. 1996. The Rejected Body. London: Routledge.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Zaks, Z.
Affiliations
Fielding Graduate University (US)
Corresponding author
Zaks, Zosia
ORCID
Zaks, Zosia
Venue
Disability & Society
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2023-09-15
Volume
39
Issue
12
Pages
3233-3260
ISSN
  • 0267-4645 (ISSN-L)
  • 0968-7599
  • 1360-0508
DOI
10.1080/09687599.2023.2255926
OpenAlex
W4386775381
Cited by
147
References
163
Citations by year
2026: 84 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 19
FWCI
36.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Disability & Society (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Rights and Representation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Medicine, History, and Philosophy
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Inclusion and Disability in Education and Sport
Keywords
medical model of disability, normalization, disability terminology, models of disability, disability rights, disability history

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review