Advertisement

What can Elder Law Learn from Disability Law?

  • D. Surtees

The question “What is disability law” is quite different from the question “what is disability?” I think the first question (about law) is considerably easier to answer than the second (about disability). Yet the answer to the first question remains woefully incomplete until we address, in some significant measure, the disability question.

Disability law then includes the study of the interaction of law and members of the disability community. This interaction may be direct or indirect. It can include value judgments with which our laws are imbued. It can include interactions as diverse as standards for the development of parks and motor vehicle licencing regulations. The interaction may create positive or negative impacts. The impact may arise from the extension of state protection from discriminatory action or it may arise from the provision of a benefit under the law. Finally disability law acts as a lens to help us see the differential impact any law or policy may have on a person with a disability. Understanding each of these aspects of what disability law is requires some examination of “who counts” as a person with a disability. Understanding this question raises the related question of “What counts as a disability?” Paradoxically, I believe that more can be learned by understanding how we have answered that question than can be learned from the answer itself.

Keywords

Minority Group Medical Model Social Model Critical Race Theory Disability Community 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Asch A (2001) Critical race theory, feminism and disability: Reflections on social justice and personal identity. Ohio St L J 62:391Google Scholar
  2. Bagenstos SR (2004) The future of disability law. Yale L J 114Google Scholar
  3. Ball CA (2005) Looking for theory in all the right places: Feminist and communitarian elements of disability discrimination law Ohio St L J 66:105Google Scholar
  4. Bickenbach J et al (1999) Models of disablement, universalism and the international classification of impairments, disabilities and handicaps. Social Sci Med 48:1173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Braddock D, Parish S (2001) An institutional history of disability. In: Albrecht G, Seelman K, Bury M (eds) Handbook of disability studies. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CAGoogle Scholar
  6. Burgdorf RL (1997) “Substantially Limited” protection from disability discrimination: The special treatment model and misconstruction of the definition of disability. Villanova L Rev 42:409Google Scholar
  7. Feleger D, Boyd P (1973) Anti-institutionalization: The promise of the Pennhurst case. Stan L R 31:717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Jones M, Marks LAB (1999) Law and the social construction of disability. In Jones M, Marks LAB (eds) Disability, divers-ability and legal change. Martinus Nijhoff, LondonGoogle Scholar
  9. Miller GP, Singer LS (2000–2001), Handicapped parking. Hofstra L Rev 29:81Google Scholar
  10. Pothier D, Devlin R (eds) (2006) Critical disability theory: Essays in philosophy, politics, policy and law. UBC Press, Vancouver and TorontoGoogle Scholar
  11. Scotch R (2000) Models of disability and the Americans with Disabilities Act. Berkeley J Empl & Lab L 21Google Scholar
  12. Sealy P, Whitehead PC (2004, pp. 249–257) Forty years of deinstitutionalization of psychiatric services in Canada: An empirical assessment. Can J Psychiatr 49Google Scholar
  13. Stein MA (2003) The law and economics of disability accommodations. Duke L J 53:79Google Scholar
  14. Stein MA (2007) Disability human rights. Cal L Rev 95Google Scholar
  15. Silvers A (1998) Formal justice in disability, difference, discrimination: Perspectives on justice in bioethics and public policyGoogle Scholar
  16. Scotch R, Schriner K (1997) Disability as human variation: Implications for policy. Ann Am Acad, AAPSS 549Google Scholar
  17. Sodden A (ed) (2005) Advising the older clients. Lexis Nexis Butterworths, Markham, ONGoogle Scholar
  18. ten Broek J, Matson FW (1966)The disabled and the law of welfare Cal L Rev 54:809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. The Roeher Institute (1996, pp. 3–5) Disability, community and society: Exploring the links. The Roeher Institute, North York, ONGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. Surtees
    • 1
  1. 1.College of LawUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatoonCanada

Personalised recommendations