In this peer commentary on L. Syd M. Johnson’s “Inference and Inductive Risk in Disorders of Consciousness,” I argue for the necessity of disability education as an integral component of decision-making processes concerning patients with DOC and, mutatis mutandis, all patients with disabilities. The sole qualification Johnson places on such decision-making is that stakeholders are educated about and “understand the uncertainties of diagnosis and prognosis.” Drawing upon research in philosophy of disability, social epistemology, and health psychology, I argue that this (...) educational qualification is insufficient to address systemic ableism and other forms of epistemic bias in quality of life judgments. (shrink)

By addressing ableism through social media and other digital outlets, feminist disability activists share stories on what it means to be human from an intersectional perspective, and their storying is a way of understanding and theorising the world. However, the possibilities of digital disability activism to story ableism within broader feminist debates are underexplored. Storying as an anti-hegemonic approach to theorising ableism further from an intersectional perspective, implemented through an activist-academic working alliance, contributes to speaking otherwise about (...) disability and draws attention to disability perspectives in feminist theory. In this article, I propose a feminist intersectional approach to storying ableism that exposes manifestations of ableism in its intersections with classism, racism and sexism at structural, identity and representational levels. I then argue for digital disability activism as a means of storying ableism, provide examples of such storying and describe the potentials and principles of digital activist storying. While the creation of further theory is central to the proposed approach, the connection of intersectionality theory with ableism and feminist disability theory serves as its foundation. I discuss how linking ableism with intersectionality strengthens the uncovering of ableism at different levels, why studies of ableism should be extended to fields beyond Disability Studies but remain closely connected to disability activism and how feminist disability theory has thus far shaped debates on the dis/ability binary in relation to the gendered body. (shrink)

Ageism and ableism are intersecting forms of marginalization that shape whose knowledge counts, whose needs are prioritized, and how care is structured in public health and bioethics. While both have been examined separately, their intersection – and the epistemic injustices that emerge from it – remains underexplored in dominant bioethical discourse. Drawing on disability studies, aging studies, and social epistemology, we conceptualize epistemic injustice at this intersection through two interrelated dynamics: absence (the exclusion of marginalized perspectives) and construction (the (...) structural production of epistemic hierarchies). These dynamics manifest not only through testimonial and hermeneutical injustice, but also through institutional norms, policy frameworks, and professional practices that shape what is recognized as legitimate knowledge. Using illustrative examples from dementia care, chronic pain, and healthcare access, we argue that ageism and ableism function as epistemic forces that structure who is heard, what is knowable, and how bioethical discourse takes shape. (shrink)

This book outlines the scale and scope of ableist bias, as it manifests both institutionally and intergenerationally. Ranging across disability studies, continental philosophy, and bioethics, the philosophical questions addressed in this work confront and resist ableism as it frames our world in uninhabitable and unsustainable ways.

In this article, I critically examine the concept of ableism within educational contexts, highlighting its normative dimensions and implications for learning in schools. Drawing on neo-institutionalist theories of education, I explore how normative expectations around ability shape educational practices and contribute to the marginalization of students with disabilities. I argue that ableism is not merely a matter of individual prejudice but is embedded in institutional structures and cultural norms. In this article, I critique the conceptual ambiguity in current (...) ableism discourse—particularly the conflation of normativity and normality—and call for a more precise analytical framework. By distinguishing between educational goals and the means to achieve them, I advocate for a multifactorial approach to combating ableism that addresses individual attitudes, institutional practices, and societal norms. (shrink)

Ableism refers to individual discrimination or social prejudice against people with physical, intellectual, or psychiatric disabilities. It is based on a concept of normality that dictates the superiority of those who comply with this standard (i.e., the concept of normality) in relation to others who are disabled and do not comply with it and hence are considered inferior. The concept of ableism was forged mainly in the second half of the 20th century in Western countries in the wake (...) of the human rights movement and its statement of the absolute and equal dignity of all people regardless of their particular characteristics such as gender (sexism), ethnicity (racism), or disability (ableism). (shrink)

[This piece is written for those working in social gerontology and aging studies, with the aim of bringing insights from disability studies and philosophy of disability to bear on enduring debates in those fields.] The guiding question of humanistic age-studies—What does it mean to grow old?—cannot be answered without reflecting on disability. This is not simply because growing old invariably means becoming impaired in various ways, but also because the discriminations and stigmas involved in ageism are often rooted in (...) class='Hi'>ableism. We here draw on research in the philosophy of disability as well as the interdisciplinary field of disability studies to explore the relationship between ageism and ableism. (shrink)

The philosophical framework of justice proposed by Nancy Fraser during the 1990s establishes two equally crucial dimensions of justice: redistribution, linked to the allocation of economic goods, and recognition, linked to the assignment of social status. This division makes it possible to distinguish between transformative strategies that intervene in the causes of social injustices and affirmative strategies that focus on their effects. However, the author’s treatment of her notion of “two-dimensional category”, which combines inequalities of redistribution and recognition, has limits (...) for thinking about the functioning of certain systems of social subordination and the situation of certain social groups. In this paper, I will use a queer-crip perspective to argue that both heterocissexism and ableism are two-dimensional categories, since they structure an unequal status system, but also sustain, define, and naturalize the capitalist mode of production and are functional to its distribution of economic goods. This critical review allows us to adapt the Fraserian framework to the current socio-political context. (shrink)

This article considers disabled people's involvement with the UK environmental movement. It draws on findings from qualitative research with disabled people in the UK exploring experiences of access to sustainable lifestyles. A number of experiences of disablism (the manifestation of oppression against disabled people) and ableism (assumptions and valorisations of non-disabled normality) were described. Similar issues were also identified in relevant documentary sources and from research into disabled people's experiences in the context of other movements such as the wider (...) anti-capitalist movement. These findings suggest that ableism may be a significant feature of the UK environmental movement. If this is the case, there are important implications for the wider success of this movement's aims in terms of achieving environmental protection, as well as for the ongoing exclusion experienced by disabled people with regard to pro-environmental activities. (shrink)

Ableism is systemic oppression based on disabilities. It is a system granting advantages for individuals without disabilities over individuals with disabilities. The chapter differentiates ableism and disablism in addition to differentiating medical model and social model. Factors contributing to continued ableism, discrimination, and prejudice (e.g., social dominance theory, systemic and internalized oppression and privilege, the role of beliefs and unconscious bias, binary thinking, automatic activation of information processing, etc.) are discussed. The chapter postulates paradigm shifts in thinking (...) and learning as effective tools for not only dismantling ableism to provide social justice and equity for people with disability/impairment but also to understand neurodiversity and the ability to see a real person who has multiple identities and their intersectionality. The chapter provides transformative learning activities immediately after discussing the relevant concept for readers to learn to access their unconscious bias through exploring their inner experience and to connect their conceptual understanding to their lived experience. (shrink)

Cet article propose de réfléchir à la manière dont les étudiants handicapés subissent le capacitisme dans sa double dimension négative (les expériences directes d’exclusion et de discrimination que vivent les personnes handicapées) et positive (les normes et principes qui façonnent notre manière de comprendre les handicap/abilités). Il s’appuie sur des recherches menées avec des personnes atteintes de maladies chroniques en Angleterre et au Portugal. Ces recherches montrent qu’il faut rester attentif aux conditions productrices d’obstacles et d’exclusion pour les étudiants atteints (...) de maladies chroniques, de manière à pouvoir les éliminer, en particulier dans des contextes comme celui du Portugal où ils restent nombreux. Il est également fondamental de mettre au jour et de déconstruire les normes et principes qui guident notre perception de la normalité et du handicap si l’on veut continuer de progresser vers une véritable égalité entre personnes handicapées et valides. (shrink)

With increased frequency, reproductive technologies are placing prospective parents in the position of choosing whether to bring a disabled child into the world. The most well-known objection to the act of “selecting against disability” is known as the Expressivist Argument. The argument claims that such acts express a negative or disrespectful message about disabled people and that one has a moral reason to avoid sending such messages. We have two primary aims in this essay. The first is to critically examine (...) the standard Expressivist Argument, which we analyze in terms of the expression of ableist attitudes. We distinguish three interpretations of the argument and argue that each version faces serious objections. Our second aim is to articulate two closely related arguments that also pertain to expressed ableist attitudes. The Expressive Harms Argument maintains that there is a moral reason to avoid actions that give rise to the perception of ableist attitudes in cases where this is likely to have negative consequences for disabled people. The Ableist Motivation Argument speaks against selecting against disability in cases where one would be motivated by ableist attitudes. While these two arguments face various objections, we seek to establish that they are more promising than the most natural interpretations of the Expressivist Argument. (shrink)

This paper argues that epistemic errors rooted in group- or identity- based biases, especially those pertaining to disability, are undertheorized in the literature on medical error. After sketching dominant taxonomies of medical error, we turn to the field of social epistemology to understand the role that epistemic schemas play in contributing to medical errors that disproportionately affect patients from marginalized social groups. We examine the effects of this unequal distribution through a detailed case study of ableism. There are four (...) primary mechanisms through which the epistemic schema of ableism distorts communication between nondisabled physicians and disabled patients: testimonial injustice, epistemic overconfidence, epistemic erasure, and epistemic derailing. Measures against epistemic injustices in general and against schema-based medical errors in particular are ultimately issues of justice that must be better addressed at all levels of health care practice. (shrink)

In many countries, such as Canada, the USA, England, and Australia, to graduate from a regulated profession such as nursing, students must complete a set of work‐integrated learning (WIL) hours and demonstrate their ability to safely perform physical skills and apply knowledge in relation to professional standards. For a disabled nursing student (DNS) undergoing training in higher education institutions (HEI), securing proper accommodations to participate effectively in WIL experiences has been difficult due to concerns related to risks to self and (...) patient safety. This study used critical discourse analysis to investigate the framing of risk and safety in association with providing DNS with accommodation in WIL. Our data were collected from an intensive codesign (group‐based discussion) session with participants (n = 16), including clinicians and DNS, from four institutions (two WIL‐sites and two HEI organizations). Using an iterative thematic approach based on Foucauldian framework, our analysis revealed three ways in which health professionals discursively framed risk and safety: (a) beliefs that a lack of disclosure by disabled students decreases patient safety and indicates poor self‐reflection, (b) concerns that accommodating students poses a risk to institutions offering WIL experiences and to the relationships between HEI and institutions offering WIL‐sites, and (c) a framing which challenges the dominant discourse by thinking about safety and risk more expansively. Our findings suggest the first two of these framings are ableist and function to enact barriers to access for DNSs in WIL, whereas the third framing serves the goal of inclusion. Recommendations to address the current ableist discourse within the Canadian nursing context are provided, which may also be applicable across other regulated health professions. (shrink)

Reliabilism says that knowledge must be produced by reliable abilities. Abilism disagrees and allows that knowledge is produced by unreliable abilities. Previous research strongly supports the conclusion that abilism better describes how knowledge is actually defined in commonsense and science. In this paper, I provide a novel argument that abilism is ethically superior to reliabilism. Whereas reliabilism unethically discriminates against agents by excluding them from knowing, abilism virtuously includes them.

Ableism refers to the discrimination of disabled people. How does it impact individuals who also suffer from sexism? Intersectionality theories posit that social identities mutually constitute, reinforce, and naturalize one another. Inspired by a ‘Marginalized in Marginalized lens,’ this paper adopts an intercategorical approach to intersectionality and applies it to study the intersection of disability and gender. We show how using the Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition can contribute to empirically quantify the penalty associated with intersectionality. We apply our proposed measure to (...) study the intersection of disability and gender in the labor market in China. Our main result is to show that, compared to other groups, disabled women have the lowest yearly labor earnings and that this situation results from them suffering a penalty from being both disabled and women that is larger than the sum of disadvantages from disability and from gender. This penalty is present along the income distribution and particularly important at the bottom of the income distribution except among top earners, suggesting a survival bias. Furthermore, we also document how much of this extra penalty is driven by an endowment effect (such as differences in educational attainment) and how much of it is driven by a price effect (suggestive of discrimination). Regarding the occupational profile of different groups, we find that disabled women are over-represented in necessity self-employment and that they face a glass ceiling to access mid-level managerial jobs, while disabled men face a glass ceiling to access top-level managerial jobs. We conclude discussing the need to take gender into account in research on ableism as well as in the design of corporate and public policy. (shrink)

This paper examines five groups of women that were instrumental in the emergence of the category of “feeblemindedness” in the United States. It analyzes the dynamics of oppression and power relations in the following five groups of women: “feebleminded” women, institutional caregivers, mothers, researchers, and reformists. Ultimately, I argue that a feminist analysis of the history of mental retardation is necessary to serve as a guide for future feminist work on cognitive disability.

In Sitting Pretty, Rebekah Taussig explains that “ableism thunders in the background of every conversation, every story, every building. It’s the atmosphere we breathe.” This description echoes many accounts of ableism within Disability Studies although few scholars have fully explored the feeling-thinking of ableism ontologically. This paper draws on Arturo Escobar’s definition of relational ontology as “a dense network of interrelation” to interrogate the lived experiences of disabled people, developing a synontology of ableism as an atmosphere. (...) Further, it uses François Raffoul’s concept of event and Edward Casey’s and Christina Sharpe’s conceptions of atmosphere to highlight the affective, temporal, and relational character of experiences with ableism, illuminating how ableism happens and providing theoretical backing for ongoing anti-ableist work. (shrink)

Volume 26, Issue 2, February 2026, Page 36-38.

This is the first of a four-part series. The main theses that will be defended are that: (a) reason/logic/intelligence is a choice and not primarily an ability, (b) ableism is irrational, and (c) most (lots of) people are jerks. The people who reduce intelligence to an ability testable by performance on conventionalized tests, are top of the list of jerks. Oh, and (d) a jerk is someone who chooses not to reason. -/- In Part 1, I make the case (...) that ADHD is philosophically interesting because, in the case of untreated ADHD, the outward behavior is almost always opposite of the motivation or intention, and ADHD people exist today in a world that prescribes norms for self-regulation that backfire in the case of ADHD people, and their way to self-regulation will often involve doing the opposite of what is prescribed. This shows that agency is not the same as ability. Agents choose. And whether they are able to implement a choice is a largely contingent and variable matter, dependent on factors outside of their control. (shrink)

This chapter surveys the impact of ableism on the sexual, reproductive, and parenting rights of people with intellectual disabilities (ID). Entrenched within societal attitudes and structures, ableism creates barriers that hinder the full realization of fundamental human rights. First, the chapter explains ableism, its adverse effects on people with ID, and how ableism lays the groundwork for eugenic ideologies and practices. Then, it examines how ableism constrains the sexual lives of people with ID, exploring pervasive (...) stigmas, stereotypes, and misconceptions that perpetuate their marginalization and disempowerment in matters of sexuality. Next, it explores ableism’s influence on access to reproductive health services and decision-making autonomy. Thereafter, the chapter analyzes challenges and discriminatory practices confronted by people with ID in relation to parenting. Following a critical examination of inequities, the chapter concludes by offering recommendations to dismantle ableism’s impact on the sexual, reproductive, and parenting rights of people with ID by transforming laws, policies, and practices. (shrink)

My aim in this paper is to show how the functionalist standards assumed in the AI debate are, in fact, the assumptions of a capitalist, ableist society writ large. The already established argument against the proposed humanity of AI systems implies a wider critique of the entire ideology of functionalism under which the notion of intelligent machines has taken root.

In this commentary, we criticize the argument that allowing euthanasia for people with disabilities is ableist. We analyze the distinction between facts and values in medical assistance in dying, the expressivist objection, and the problem of crypwashing.

Introduction This article is a response to Zagouras, Ellick, and Aulisio who presented a case study justifying the questioning of the capacity and autonomy of a young woman with a physical disability who was pregnant and facing coercive pressure to terminate. Case description Julia is described as a 26-year-old woman with a neurological disability that requires her to receive assistance with activities of daily living. She was described as living with her parents who provided her with personal care assistance. Julia (...) became pregnant and her parents wished her to terminate because they did not want to care for her child in addition to her. In fact, Julia's parents threatened her with institutionalization if she did not elect to terminate the pregnancy. Her health care team questioned her decision-making capacity based on her alleged “mental age” and experiences of being sheltered and excluded. The health care team used directive tactics to convince Julia to terminate the pregnancy, which describe as both an ethical and feminist intervention. Discussion The current authors take issue with the case analysis provided by and argue that they neglected to account for numerous instances of systemic ableism that adversely affected Julia, demonstrated prejudicial and judgmental attitudes toward pregnancy and disability, inappropriately questioned her decision-making capacity by infantilizing her, misconstrued the feminist concept of relational autonomy, and colluded with coercive interference from family members. This is a classic example of discriminatory and culturally incompetent reproductive health care for a disabled woman. (shrink)

Disabled people face obstacles to participation in epistemic communities that would be beneficial for making sense of our experiences and are susceptible to epistemic oppression. Knowledge and skills grounded in disabled people's experiences are treated as unintelligible within an ableist hermeneutic, specifically, the dominant conception of disability as lack. My discussion will focus on a few types of epistemic oppression—willful hermeneutical ignorance, epistemic exploitation, and epistemic imperialism—as they manifest in some bioethicists’ claims about and interactions with disabled people. One of (...) the problems with the epistemic phenomena with which I am concerned is that they direct our skepticism regarding claims and justifications in the wrong direction. When we ought to be asking dominantly situated epistemic agents to justify their knowledge claims, our attention is instead directed toward skepticism regarding the accounts of marginally situated agents who are actually in a better position to know. I conclude by discussing disabled knowers’ responses to epistemic oppression, including articulating the epistemic harm they have undergone as well as ways of creating resistant ways of knowing. (shrink)

BackgroundThe concept of ‘successful ageing’ has been a prominent focus within the field of gerontology for several decades. However, despite the widespread attention paid to this concept, its intersectional implications have not been fully explored yet. This paper aims to address this gap by analyzing the potential ageist and ableist biases in the discourse of successful ageing through an intersectional lens.MethodA critical feminist perspective is taken to examine the sensitivity of the discourse of successful ageing to diversity in societies. The (...) paper analyzes how ageist and ableist biases can manifest in the ways we conceptualize ageing, drawing on examples in the context of mental health.ResultsWe argue that the conventional approach to successful ageing is limited in its ability to account for the experiences of people who have faced intersectional discrimination throughout their lives. Drawing on examples in the context of mental health, we explore among others the link between depression and disabilities. Furthermore, we shed light on the negative impact of ageist and ableist attitudes concerning the diagnosis and treatment of dementia.DiscussionWe demonstrate how diversity is often overlooked in discussions of ageing well, and how ageist and ableist biases can manifest in the ways we conceptualize ageing. We argue that focusing solely on the health status as a means of achieving success fails to adequately counter ageism for all people. We further emphasize the role of structural factors, such as ageist attitudes, in shaping the experience of ageing and exacerbating health inequalities.ConclusionOverall, our findings emphasize the need for a more nuanced and inclusive understanding of ageing and therefore an intersectional approach to conceptions of ageing well that recognizes and addresses the biases and limitations of current discourses. Thereby, this paper offers valuable insights into the complex intersections between age and disabilities from a bioethical perspective, highlighting the need for a more inclusive and intersectional approach to ageing. (shrink)

In this study, we examine the narratives of Hungarian entrepreneurs with disabilities (EWD) of the post-socialist era, using microhistory. Our research question concerns how ableism appears in the lives of EWD and how the aftermath of socialism emerges in their experience of ableism. We believe that a state-socialist past influences the lives and careers of EWD in a way that is unique in entrepreneurial and disability literature. Drawing on the accounts of 29 Hungarian entrepreneurs, we identified four mechanisms (...) that make post-socialist ableism specific: invisibility; passivity and welfare dependency; the legitimacy of disability organisations; as well as the limitations of economic participation. Our research suggests that these effects, embedded in the current political, social, and economic environment, can only change slowly and over a long time. (shrink)

This chapter explores the concept of ableism (that is, prejudice and discrimination based on disability), and the impact that ableism has had, and continues to have, on the implementation and expansion of Canada’s MAID regime. More specifically, it considers the ways in which systemic ableism limits social and economic opportunities for people with disabilities, sometimes to the degree that they are compelled to seek an assisted death because they cannot access sufficient assistance to live. The chapter concludes (...) with reflections on what the expansion of MAID in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic reveals about the depth to which systemic ableism is ingrained in Canadian society, and the existential threat that this poses for people with disabilities in Canada. (shrink)

This paper has two goals. The first is to argue that the field of bioethics in general and the literature on ideal vs. nonideal theory in particular has underemphasized a primary problem for normative theorizing: the role of conditioning principles. I define these as principles that implicitly or explicitly ground, limit, or otherwise determine the construction and function of other principles, and, as a result, profoundly impact concept formation, perception, judgment, and action, et al. The second is to demonstrate that (...) ableism is one such conditioning principle and that it undermines the field of bioethics and the practice of biomedicine from achieving the aim of justice as fairness. After briefly addressing the history and critiques of principlism in bioethics, I lay out and defend my account of conditioning principles. I then argue that ableism is one such principle and demonstrate it at work through an analysis of a storied debate between Eva Kittay, Peter Singer, and Jeff McMahan. In conclusion, I contend that the ethical and philosophical dangers of conditioning principles are too easily exacerbated by ideal theory frameworks, and I do so by demonstrating how they are especially liable to generate epistemic injustice, especially contributory and hermeneutical injustice. (shrink)

Although laws have been passed to promote disability inclusion in French workplaces, many companies face challenges complying with the required quota of disabled workers. Workplace ableism hinders the implementation of disability laws. To move from apathy to increased compliance, insider activists took proactive action, uncovered ableist practices, and mobilized colleagues at different levels. In this article, I study how some disability rights activists managed to obtain positions as disability managers in their companies in the late 2000s, gaining the ability (...) to design inclusive policies for their organizations. Using ethnographic interviews, I explore how they use their own identities to address ableism, mobilize colleagues to promote the inclusion of disabled workers, and empower disabled employees to obtain accommodation. This study sheds light on the individual, relational, and structural work necessary to move from anti-ableist laws to a concrete and recoupled implementation in the workplace. This also explains why companies offer positions to activists to develop blueprints for compliance. Activists’ work was recognized because regulations were ambiguous but created financial sanctions for non-compliance; ableist cultures created distrust among disabled workers; and organizations needed activists’ extra work to design programs, build expertise, and develop tools to promote inclusion. (shrink)

This essay explores the relationship between the modern era’s impulse toward control and the practices of family planning and disability-selective abortion. Drawing from experiences as a pediatric palliative care physician working within a busy fetal care program, as well as the social theory of sociologist Hartmut Rosa, the author argues that there is an unresolved cultural and professional conflict within perinatal medicine between maximizing control of the future and maximizing a culture of anti-ableism.

Disability is a complicated notion. The Americans with Disabilities Act defines a person with a disability as someone who has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more everyday activities.

An e-mail interview made by Francisco Guzmán. April 2010.

The disregard for disability rights in Kurdistan-Iraq is apparent in all sectors, including education. Life story interviews of Kurdish people with disabilities reveal pervasive institutionalized academic ableism. The meanings of disability vary from one culture to the next, and global North frameworks are not always a good fit with global South communities. While accessible education is lacking at present, there are effective organizations of Kurdish people with disabilities who are working on implementing it.

Much can be learned about (old) age-identity and age-related oppression by noting their similarities to, respectively, impairment and ableism. Drawing upon the work of Shelley Tremain, I show that old age, like impairment, is not a biological given but is socially constructed, both conceptually and materially. I also describe the striking similarities and connections between ableism and ageism as systems of oppression. That disability and aging both rest upon a biological given is a fiction that functions to excuse (...) and perpetuate the very social mechanisms that perpetuate ableist and ageist oppression. (shrink)

ResumoTomando como referência o campo dos estudos sobre deficiência (disability studies) e a conceitualização de capacitismo – forma particular de marginalização das pessoas com deficiência –, o artigo investiga a ligação entre as ideias eugenistas e o surgimento de uma modalidade de educação destinada a essas pessoas, a educação especial. Nesse sentido, as ciências biomédicas, ao operarem uma separação entre normalidade e anormalidade ofereceram as bases necessárias para a distinção entre capazes e incapazes, tornando estes inferiores àqueles. Por sua vez, (...) isso leva a pôr em questão as matrizes epistemológicas que subjazem tais distinções, considerando-as como participantes nos fundamentos do pensamento ocidental e, portanto, implicadas nos projetos políticos que desembocaram em segregação racial, social e desumanização de diferentes grupos.Palavras-chave: Estudos sobre Deficiência. Capacitismo. Educação. Educação Especial. AbstractTaking as reference the field of disability studies and the conceptualization of ableism - a particular form of marginalization of people with disabilities - this article investigates the connection between eugenic ideas and the emergence of a modality of education aimed at these people: special education. In this sense, the biomedical sciences offered, by operating a separation between normality and abnormality, the necessary basis for the distinction between capable and incapable, making these inferior to those. In turn, this leads us to question the epistemological matrices that underlie such distinctions, considering them as participants in the foundations of Western thought and, therefore, implicated in the political projects that led to racial, social segregation and dehumanization of different groups.Keywords: Disability Studies. Ableism. Education. Special Education. (shrink)

_A comprehensive study that is also practical and realistic, _New Directions in Special Education_ outlines principles for decisionmaking about special education at every level—from the family to the classroom, school, and district—and for state and federal policy._ With this volume, leading scholar and disability advocate Thomas Hehir opens a new round of debate on the future of special education. Extending the conceptual framework developed in his seminal 2002 article in the _Harvard Educational Review_, "Eliminating Ableism in Education," Hehir examines (...) the ways that cultural attitudes about disability systematically distort the education of children with special needs and uses this analysis to lay out a fresh approach to special education policy and practice. Hehir traces the roots of "ableism"—the pervasive devaluation of people with disabilities—and shows how negative attitudes continue to shape debates in the field. He assesses recent trends in special education policy, particularly the shift of emphasis from compliance to outcomes, and discusses in depth the successes and limitations of the inclusion movement. He also investigates the impact of standards-based reforms on children with disabilities and critically examines the promise of Universal Design for Learning. (shrink)

The emerging field of eco-ability draws attention to important connections between the injustices faced by people with disabilities and the injustices faced by non-human animals and the rest of the natural world (Nocella et al. 2012). Recognizing the common roots of different forms of injustice can be illuminating and unifying, creating powerful allies in the quest for a just society. At the same time, Anthony Nocella rightly cautions that one should be careful not to exaggerate commonalities, intersections, and analogies between (...) different forms of oppression (2015). To overstate connections between different forms of discrimination risks misrepresenting that discrimination, thereby perpetuating it or at least failing to address it adequately. This cautiousness about analogizing oppressions is all the more important for eco-activists who exist within a privileged position in civil society. The potential for eco-ability studies to build lasting coalitions hinges on scholars’ ability to strike the right balance between drawing connections and acknowledging differences in a thoughtful way. In this paper, I explore some of the connections and differences between ableism, speciesism and ecocide by focusing on two oft-cited themes: reason and normalcy. My hope in doing so is to illuminate some of the more compelling connections that can move us forward on the path toward a more just world. (shrink)

The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) is celebrated internationally and viewed as a significant tool through which disabled persons will come to enjoy greater inclusion in society. It is the first international human rights convention to include references to multiple discrimination in its binding text. This chapter examines how race and Indigeneity are rendered visible or invisible by the CRPD. It examines the CPRD Committee’s approach to multiple discrimination, as it is principally through the inclusion of (...) this concept that a space for the consideration of race and Indigeneity has been made. The chapter outlines relevant historical deliberations regarding the place of race and Indigeneity in the CRPD. It then offers two Canadian case studies that demonstrate the significant ways in which disability and race create intersectional discrimination, the risk of using a race-evasive approach to disability discrimination, and the possibility of adopting an intersectional analysis using the CRPD. (shrink)

This paper builds on prior critical scholarship on Agriculture 4.0—an umbrella term to reference the utilization of robotics and automation, AI, remote sensing, big data, and the like in agriculture—especially the literature focusing on issues relating to equity and social sustainability. Critical agrifood scholarship has spent considerable energy interrogating who gets what, how decisions get made, and who counts as a “stakeholder” in the context of decision making, questions relating to distributive justice, procedural justice, and representative justice, respectively. Less attention, (...) however, has been paid in this literature to the subject of recognition justice. Recognition justice asks the question, “Who are subjects of justice?” That query, however, is easily to oversimplify. As subjectivity is neither monolithic nor fixed, implied in these discussions are deeper questions having to do with the characteristics of one’s subjectivity that deserve moral recognition. This act of translation, from justice-in-theory to justice-in-practice, also complicates the evaluation of whether Agriculture 4.0 platforms are just, or not. These recognition justice tensions are explored by leveraging qualitative data collected through forty-two face-to-face interviews with individuals on farms located in the US states of Arizona, California, Colorado, New Mexico, and Wyoming who utilize these platforms. The study design intentionally oversampled for persons with disabilities, which highlights another distinguishing characteristic of the paper relative to critical Agriculture 4.0 scholarship. In addition to exposing certain ableist assumptions in these discussions, the sampling technique proved invaluable for interrogating how we think about labor, work, and leisure in agriculture. The paper specifically discusses how Agriculture 4.0, for example, shapes conceptions of what it means to be “able to work,” “willing to work,” “hard working,” etc. (shrink)

Body Integrity Identity Disorder (BIID) is a very rare condition describing those with an intense desire or need to move from a state of ability to relative impairment, typically through the amputation of one or more limbs. In this paper, I draw upon research in critical disability studies and philosophy of disability to critique arguments based upon the principle of nonmaleficence against such surgery. I demonstrate how the action-relative concept of harm in such arguments relies upon suspect notions of biological (...) and statistical normality, and I contend that each fail to provide normative guidance. I then propose a critical theory of harm, one marked by substantive engagement with both empirical and reflective inquiry across the sciences, social sciences, and humanities. I conclude by discussing the implications of this theory and how it might enrich ongoing debates in bioethics, philosophy of disability, and the health humanities. (shrink)

Amongst disruptive technologies in twenty-first century, digital twinning has been the backbone of the industry 4.0. This technology has also been increasingly applied to medicine and precision public health by creating digital human twins (DHT). However, the transformative nature of this technology also brings social and societal implications. This article addresses the research question of ‘What are the social implications of DHT development and the accompanying discourse in relation to disability?’ by critically reviewing and discussing the implications of the technology (...) for disabled people and for their work and employment. In doing so, we fundamentally take socio-technical view which has dual focus on excellence in technology development as well as the equality that is afforded to people. Two key sociological theories underpin our discussion, namely 1) socio-materiality in the light of agentic capacity of DHT; and 2) technoableism and epistemic injustice rooted in critical disability study. Our aim of the paper is to offer provoking yet helpful points to think in addressing questions around the social implications of the DHT development to the disabled people. We raise novel questions of ethics on AI and DHT based on our arguments regarding agentic capacity of the technology and epistemic injustice faced by disabled people. We conclude our paper by suggesting the potential for DHT to be used to enhance disabled people’s well-being and sense of togetherness in the workplace and the society. (shrink)

This chapter is about personhood in relation to ethics and to conciliar Christian theology, and how concepts of personhood may discriminate against profoundly cognitively disabled human beings. (By ‘conciliar Christian theology’ I mean the Christian theology that is articulated in, or endorsed by, the first seven ecumenical councils.) -/- I believe we can learn several things about personhood by looking at these two topics together. By examining ancient and medieval concepts of personhood and some modern conceptions of personhood we gain (...) a better grasp of the variety of concepts and what substantive work they were intended to do. By becoming familiar with (part of) the history of concepts of personhood we are better situated to appreciate and judge the theoretical work that these concepts were intended to do and what consequences they have in ethical and theological theorizing. -/- In the first section I tell a select history of moral philosophers theorizing about personhood and discuss these in relation to human beings with profound cognitive disability. I focus on John Locke, Immanuel Kant, and Mary Anne Warren. In the “When Personhood Is Discriminatory” section I argue that concepts of personhood, especially modern concepts of personhood, are typically used in a manner that discriminates against human beings with profound cognitive disabilities. I give two arguments against discriminatory uses of personhood, the Moral Shift Argument and the Argument against Exclusive Personhood. Although the Moral Shift Argument is deductively valid, it probably has little persuasive power over those who do not share the moral belief that profoundly cognitively disabled human beings are equal members of the moral community. However, the Argument against Exclusive Personhood has more argumentative force because it denies the claims that personhood is “self-evident” and that it is “obvious” to everyone. In the following section I survey a select history of concepts of personhood in order to establish the claims that concepts of personhood are not self-evident and are not obvious to everyone. This history of personhood goes back to ancient and medieval Christian theorizing and debating about personhood. It shows that concepts of personhood are not “self-evident” but rather are theoretical posits that are posited in theory construction in order to explain certain putative theological facts. Given that personhood is a theoretical posit and is not “self-evident,” moral philosophers who aim to determine the extent of the moral community on the basis of a supposedly “self-evident” concept of personhood are not justified in doing so. Moreover, given the Argument against Exclusive Personhood, philosophical theologians who wish to articulate models of the Trinity or Incarnation that are consistent with the seven ecumenical councils will find that they, like moral philosophers, are not justified to assume, or to insist on, modern personhood for their models of the Trinity or Incarnation. My overall conclusion, then, is that modern personhood is bad for ethics and unnecessary for conciliar ecumenical Christian theology. (shrink)