Beyond (Models of) Disability?

Area of Science:

• Disability Studies
• Bioethics
• Philosophy of Science

Background:

• Establishing definitive models of disability prior to ethical analysis presents significant challenges.
• The normative and value-laden nature of disability concepts complicates attempts at value-neutral definitions.

Purpose of the Study:

• To critically evaluate the strategy of creating disability ontologies or models before resolving ethical dilemmas.
• To explore the implications of the contested and value-laden nature of the concept of disability for ethical considerations.

Main Methods:

• Conceptual analysis of disability as a concept.
• Ethical reasoning regarding the definition and application of disability.
• Examination of the relationship between conceptualization and ethical problem-solving.

Main Results:

• Key definitional aspects of disability are normative and resist value-neutrality.
• The contested nature of disability makes it difficult to justify one interpretation over others.
• Attempts to create definitive models are conceptually problematic.

Conclusions:

• The concept of disability should remain ethically open-ended or broad to accommodate diverse ethical issues.
• Alternatively, abandoning the concept of disability may allow for a more focused examination of specific ethical concerns.
• The choice between these approaches should consider political implications rather than solely conceptual factors.