Models of disability
Abstract
This paper critically reviews medical approaches to the identification and treatment of disability. The medical model locates disability within individuals. By contrast, this paper argues that disability cannot be understood outside its social context. As such, some of the assumptions about normality and difference which underpin traditional approaches to the diagnosis and treatment of disabled people are challenged. If it is accepted that disability is located not solely within the mind or body of an individual, but rather in the relationship between people with particular bodily and intellectual differences and their social environment, then greater focus may be placed on ameliorating disability through changes in social policy, culture and institutional practices.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The conventional medical paradigm approaches autism as a disability primarily rooted within individuals.
“The conventional medical paradigm, also known as the medical model of disability (Llewellyn & Hogan, 2000; Marks, 1997), approaches autism as a disability primarily rooted within individuals.”
From Annual Research Review: Shifting from ‘normal science’ to neurodiversity in autism science (2022) · cites this paper as Marks, 1997
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 56 · Cited by 308
- Authors
- Marks, D.
- Affiliations
- University of Sheffield (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Marks, Deborah
- Venue
- Disability and Rehabilitation
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1997-01
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 85-91
- ISSN
- 0963-8288 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-5165
- OpenAlex
- W2153355731
- Cited by
- 308
- References
- 56
- Citations by year
- 2026: 25 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 2.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Disability and Rehabilitation (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Rights and Representation
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Medicine, History, and Philosophy
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
- Keywords
- medical model of disability, social model of disability, disability diagnosis, social context of disability, social policy, institutional practices
- MeSH terms
- Persons with Disabilities, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Models, Theoretical, Social Environment
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
