Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Search research articles

Related Experiment Videos

On disability and illness. A reply to Edwards.

¹Department of Health and Society, University of Linköping, Sweden.

Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics

|August 18, 1999

Summary

This paper refutes criticisms of a health and disability theory, arguing a proposed distinction between types of disability is insufficient. It clarifies the theory

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

On the notion of health as ability. Previously published in Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy 1996; 3: 101-105.

Scandinavian journal of occupational therapy·2014

Same author

On the goals of medicine, health enhancement and social welfare.

Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy·2001

Same author

On the comparative approach to defining health: a reply to Brülde.

Medicine, health care, and philosophy·2001

Same author

On medicine and health enhancement--towards a conceptual framework.

Medicine, health care, and philosophy·2000

Same author

Descriptive or normative conceptual analysis--a reply to Henk ten Have.

Medicine, health care, and philosophy·2000

Same author

On setting priorities in the health area--a reply to Joachim Widder.

Medicine, health care, and philosophy·2000

Area of Science:

Bioethics
Philosophy of Medicine
Disability Studies

Background:

This paper addresses criticisms by Steven Edwards regarding the author's theory of health and disability.
Edwards identified a tension between subjectivistic and objectivistic elements in the health definition and an inability to distinguish between illness-related and other disabilities.

Discussion:

The author argues Edwards's first criticism stems from a misunderstanding of the theory's intentions.
The second criticism regarding the distinction of disability types is considered more pertinent, raising key issues in health theory and the interpretation of illness.

Key Insights:

The author contends that Edwards's proposed notion of 'capacity' does not adequately differentiate between disability arising from illness/injury and disability with a different background.
The paper asserts that the proposed distinction fails to fulfill its intended purpose in the theory of disability.

Outlook:

Further refinement of the theory of disability is needed to address the nuances of illness and non-illness-related impairments.
Continued dialogue in bioethics is crucial for developing comprehensive models of health and disability.

Related Experiment Videos