Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

UK Social Model of Disability and the Quest for Emancipation

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Disability

Abstract

The route to disabled people’s emancipation is complex and requires a critique of how the organization of the social world contributes to disabled people’s marginalization. To achieve this, contingents within disability activism have focused on identifying the material and discursive arrangements that (re)produce disabling barriers for people with impairments, health conditions, and diagnostic labels. Activists articulate micro-, meso-, and macro-solutions to destabilize the arrangements that perpetuate disabled people’s marginalization and implement alternatives to support disabled people’s participation in society. For disability activism and disabled people’s social movements to operate effectively, activists need to maintain solidarity. In the UK, activists and social movement members have attempted to build a consensus through determining what disability is and how it is experienced (Griffiths, 2019). This has led to the creation and adoption of the social model of disability – an interpretation that positions disability as an oppressive force, which is imposed on people with impairments through the organization of society (UPIAS, 1975).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barnes, C. (2012). Re-thinking disability, work and welfare. Sociology Compass, 6(6), 472–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, C., & Mercer, G. (Eds.). (2005). Disability policy and practice: Applying the social model of disability. The Disability Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • BCODP. (1997). The disabled People’s movement – Book four – A resource pack for local groups of disabled people. BCODP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beckett, A. E., & Campbell, T. (2015). The social model of disability as an oppositional device. Disability & Society, 30(2), 270–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beresford, P., Nettle, M., & Perring, R. (2010). Towards a social model of madness and distress? Exploring what service users say. Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beresford, P., Perring, R., Nettle, M., & Wallcraft, J. (2016). From mental illness to a social model of madness and distress. Shaping Our Lives.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berghs, M., Atkin, K., Graham, H., Hatton, C., & Thomas, C. (2016). Implications for public health research of models and theories of disability: A scoping study and evidence synthesis. NIHR Journals Library.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunbury, S. (2019). Unconscious bias and the medical model: How the social model may hold the key to transformative thinking about disability discrimination. International Journal of Discrimination and the Law, 19(1), 26–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J., & Oliver, M. (1996). Disability politics: Understanding our past, changing our future. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clifford, E. (2020). The war on disabled people: Capitalism, welfare and the making of a human catastrophe. Zed Books.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Clough, B. (2015). ‘People like that’: Realising the social model in mental capacity jurisprudence. Medical Law Review, 23(1), 53–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crow, L. (2007). Including all of our lives: Renewing the social model of disability. In N. Watson (Ed.), Disability: Major themes in health and social welfare. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deal, M. (2003). Disabled people’s attitudes toward other impairment groups: A hierarchy of impairments. Disability & Society, 18(7), 897–910.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Degener, T. (2016). Disability in a human rights context. Laws, 5(3), 35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Department for Work and Pensions. (2019). 2019 Progress report on the UK’s vision to build a society which is fully inclusive of disabled people. UK Government.

    Google Scholar 

  • ENIL. (2020). ENIL’s feedback on the action plan to implement the European pillar of social rights. ENIL.

    Google Scholar 

  • ENIL. (2021). Our mission. ENIL.

    Google Scholar 

  • ENIL Youth. (2015). Constitution. ENIL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erevelles, N. (2011). Disability and difference in global contexts. Enabling a transformative body politic. Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finkelstein, V. (1987). Disabled people and our culture development. DIAL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finkelstein, V. (2001). The social model of disability repossessed. Coalition of Disabled People.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finkelstein, V. (2007). The ‘Social model of disability’ and the disability movement. Coalition of Disabled People.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1997). Sex, power and the politics of identity. In P. Rabinow (Ed.), Essential works of Foucault: Ethics, subjectivity, truth (Vol. 1, pp. 163–174). The New Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • French, S., & Swain, J. (2008). Understanding disability – A guide for health professionals. Churchill Livingstone.

    Google Scholar 

  • French, S., & Swain, J. (2011). Working with disabled people in policy and practice. Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graby, S. (2015). Neurodiversity: Bridging the gap between the disabled People’s movement and the mental health system survivors’ movement? In H. Spandler, J. Anderson, & B. Sapey (Eds.), Madness, distress and the politics of disablement (pp. 231–243). Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, M. (2019). “These days are ours”: Young disabled People’s experiences of activism and participation in social movements. In M. Berghs, T. Chataika, Y. El-Lahib, & A. K. Dube (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of disability activism (pp. 57–71). Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, M. (2020). Disability. In N. Ellison & T. Haux (Eds.), Handbook on society and social policy (pp. 122–134). Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hallett, S. (2015). ‘Enabling the disabled’: The growing role of civil Society in Disability Rights Advocacy. In A. Fulda (Ed.), Civil society contributions to policy innovation in the PR China (pp. 173–195). Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hanes, R., Brown, I., & Hansen, N. E. (2018). The Routledge history of disability. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harpur, P. (2012). Embracing the new disability rights paradigm: The importance of the convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. Disability & Society, 27(1), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hasler, F. (1993). Developments in the disabled People’s movement. In J. Swain, V. Finkelstein, S. French, & M. Oliver (Eds.), Disabled barriers – Enabling environments (pp. 275–299). Sage in Association with the Open University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawes, L. C. (1975). Pragmatics of Analoguing: Theory and model construction in communication. Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, B. (2007). The oppositional device or, taking matters into whose hands? In J. Billing, M. Lind, & L. Nilsson (Eds.), Taking the matter into common hands: Contemporary art and collaborative practices (pp. 35–41). Black Dog Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, B. (2015). Disabled people as counterfeit citizens: The politics of resentment past and present. Disability & Society, 30(7), 991–1004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, J. (2019). No limits: The disabled people’s movement – A radical history. TBR Consulting.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, P. (1966). Stigma: The experience of disability. Geoffrey Chapman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kayess, R., & French, P. (2008). Out of darkness into Light? Introducing the convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. Human Rights Law Review, 8(1), 1–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, C. (2011). Making ‘care’ accessible: Personal assistance for disabled people and the politics of language. Critical Social Policy, 31(4), 562–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, A., & Beckett, A. E. (2020). The social and human rights models of disability: Towards a complementarity thesis. The International Journal of Human Rights, 1–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, J. (2001). Disability as a cultural identity. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 11(3), 203–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liberation Network. (1981). In from the cold. Liberation Network.

    Google Scholar 

  • Light, R. (2010). Social model or unsociable muddle? In J. Rix, M. Nind, K. Sheehy, K. Simmons, & C. Walsh (Eds.), Equality, participation and inclusion 1: Diverse perspectives (pp. 119–124). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millward, G. (2014). Social security policy and the early disability movement – Expertise, disability, and the government, 1965–77. Twentieth Century British History, 26(2), 274–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, J. (1991). Pride against prejudice. Women’s Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, J. (2013). Welfare reform and the social model of disability. Jenny Morris blog. Available from: https://jennymorrisnet.blogspot.com/2013/09/welfare-reform-and-social-model-of.html

  • Oliver, M. (1990). The politics of disablement. Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, M. (2013). The social model of disability: Thirty years on. Disability & Society, 28(7), 1024–1026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oslund, C. M. (2015). Disability services and disability studies in higher education: History, contexts, and social impacts. Palgrave Pivot.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Reeve, D. (2014). Psycho-emotional disablism and internalised oppression. In S. Swain, C. French, C. Barnes, & C. Thomas (Eds.), Disabling barriers – Enabling environments (Vol. 3, pp. 92–98). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • ROFA. (2016). Mission statement. ROFA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shakespeare, T., & Watson, N. (2001). The social model of disability: An outdated ideology? In S. N. Barnartt & B. M. Altman (Eds.), Exploring theories and expanding methodologies: Where we are and where we need to go (Vol. 2, pp. 9–28). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Shakespeare, T., & Watson, N. (2010). Beyond models: Understanding the complexity of disabled People’s lives. In G. Scambler & S. Scambler (Eds.), New directions in the sociology of chronic and disabling conditions: Assaults on the lifeworld (pp. 57–76). Palgrave Macmillan UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sisters of Frida. (2021). Sisters of Frida’s guide to accessible online communication – A toolkit. Sisters of Frida.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone, D. A. (1984). The disabled state. Temple University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, E., & Priestley, M. (1996). Parasites, pawns and partners: Disability research and the role of non-disabled researchers. The British Journal of Sociology, 47(4), 699–716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thill, C. (2015). Listening for policy change: How the voices of disabled people shaped Australia’s National Disability Insurance Scheme. Disability & Society, 30(1), 15–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Todd, Z., Griffiths, M., Agustsdottir, E., Kichashki, P., & Maraz, D. (2012). Young people with disabilities as future leaders of the independent living movement. ENIL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Townsend, P. (1966). Foreword. In P. Hunt (Ed.), Stigma: The experience of disability (pp. 1–6). Geoffrey Chapman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Traustadóttir, R. (2009). Disability studies, the social model and legal developments. In O. D. Arnardóttir & G. Quinn (Eds.), The UN convention on the rights of persons with disabilities: European and Scandinavian perspectives (pp. 1–16). BRILL.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations. (2004). International norms and standards relating to disability. United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • UPIAS. (1975). Fundamental principles of disability. UPIAS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, S. (2004). Disability equality training – Constructing a collaborative model. Disability & Society, 19(7), 703–719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams-Findlay, B. (2020). More than a left foot. IMG Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright-Mills, C. (1959). The sociological imagination. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, R., Reeve, M., & Grill, N. (2016). The functions of disabled People’s Organisations (DPOs) in low and middle-income countries: A literature review. Disability, CBR and Inclusive Development, 27(3), 45–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research Fellow, School of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK

    Miro Griffiths

Authors
  1. Miro Griffiths
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Miro Griffiths .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Health, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Marcia H. Rioux

  2. Advocacy Director, International Disability Alliance, Toronto, ON, Canada

    José Viera

  3. School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

    Alexis Buettgen

  4. Department of Anthropology, University at Buffalo, State University, Buffalo, NY, USA

    Ezra Zubrow

Section Editor information

  1. Disability, MagWaz Physiotherapy & Wellness Services, Lilongwe, Malawi

    Margaret Wazakili

  2. School of Law and Centre for Disability Studies, University of Leeds, Leeds, West Yorkshire, UK

    Anna Lawson

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Griffiths, M. (2022). UK Social Model of Disability and the Quest for Emancipation. In: Rioux, M.H., Viera, J., Buettgen, A., Zubrow, E. (eds) Handbook of Disability. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1278-7_54-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1278-7_54-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-16-1278-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-16-1278-7

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation