Encyclopedia of Global Bioethics

Living Edition
| Editors: Henk ten Have

Disability

  • Patrick Kermit
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05544-2_141-1

Abstract

Disability is a contested concept prevalent in many bioethical discussions. This text presents disability as a phenomenon described within the academic tradition of so-called disability studies. This tradition describes disability mainly as a social phenomenon and distinguishes between impairment – the bodily state of someone’s being – and disability. The latter is largely described as the result of social processes such as discrimination and lack of accessibility. As many bioethicists building different arguments have mobilized cases involving the disabled, but at the same time described disability as a mere medical and pathological state of being, there is a tension between some bioethical discourses and disability studies. This text provides some prominent examples of such discourses.

Keywords

Disability Impairment Bioethics Prenatal diagnosis Wrongful life Cochlear implant 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Agich, G. J. (1997). Toward a pragmatic theory of disease. In J. Humber & R. Almeder (Eds.), What is disease? (pp. 219–246). Totowa: Humana Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. London: Pearson Education Limited.Google Scholar
  3. Goffman, E. E. (1968). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  4. Goodley, D. (2011). Disability studies. An interdisciplinary introduction. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  5. Harris, J. (2000). Is there a coherent social conception of disability? Journal of Medical Ethics, 26, 95–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Oliver, M. (1996). Understanding disability: From theory to practice. Basingstoke: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  7. Ouellette, A. (2011). Bioethics and disability. Toward a disability-conscious bioethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Savulescu, J. (2008). Procreative beneficence: Reasons to not have disabled children. In L. Skene & J. Thompson (Eds.), The sorting society. The ethics of genetic screening and therapy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Scully, J. L. (2008). Disability bioethics. Moral bodies. Moral difference. Gloucester: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, INC.Google Scholar
  10. Shakespeare, T. (2006). Disability rights and wrongs. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Singer, P. (1994). Rethinking life and death – The collapse of our traditional ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. World Health Organization. (2011). World report on disability 2011. WHO Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data. MaltaGoogle Scholar

Further Readings

  1. Goodley, D. (2011). Disability studies. An interdisciplinary introduction. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  2. Ouellette, A. (2011). Bioethics and disability. Toward a disability-conscious bioethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Scully, J. L. (2008). Disability bioethics. Moral bodies. Moral difference. Gloucester: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, INC.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) and NTNU Social ResearchTrondheimNorway