Theoretical Frameworks for Understanding Disability Since the study of disabilities many different theories have arisen and many have been tried. Some have fallen to the side as they have evolved in to something else, or discovered to not be very proactive in helping the individual. Here we will discuss four of the major theoretical frameworks for understanding disability; the Medical Model, Social Model, Principal of Normalisation and Social Role Valorisation. In learning about each we can see that it is not possible to simply say that one is absolutely correct, and that we require a mixture of these to have the best outeome. Medical professionals are considered to be the first group of people to do in-depth research in to disability (O'Brien, Newell, McEninery, & Thesing, 2006). From this came what is now referred to as the Medical Model. It is based on looking at the condition a person has and seeing it as a type of illness which needs to be cured. Within this model, assessments are done on an individual to see how they differ from the average. It can take in to account a range of IQ tests or other similar structured activities to see how a person rates. Once these results have been analysed we ean then give that person a label, and mark them as disabled. It is then possible to start looking at ways to fix the person, ‘The Medical Model is definitely something that is required. It can help us understand an individual and to help see how they may see the world. If person or their family requires assistance from the government or other services itis often the label that will be looked at first, It is this label which helps them gain access to the help they require. Itis also important 1 for the medical world to continue to do research in to disability as new research brings about more and more useful information. ‘The downfall of the Medical Model is that it only looks at the person’s deficiency (Dempsey & Nankervis, 2006). It doesn’t take in to account the person’s life as a whole or how that person interacts with the community. It is a theory which is completely run by the doctors and medical staff. So although itis required it falls far short of all that is necessary. Social Model of disability is in contrast to the Medical Model. Its beginnings were when people with disabilities started to stand up and fight against the discrimination (Barnes, Mereer, & Shakespeare, ND). Social Model sees the problem as the services and staff who 2 derive an income from disabilities. Disability has become a profitable industry in whieh, money can be made. It is in the best interest of the company for people with disabilities to be reliant on them, The Social Mode! is when the person with the disability takes control of their own life Where they can stand up for what they want and not have something forced upon them. It relies more on the legal framework and for people who have disabilities to know their rights. One of the main problems with this is that it doesn’t really work for everyone. It makes a lot more sense for a person with a physical disability then for a person with an intellectual disability. Many people with physical disabilities can have full control over the decisionmaking in their lives. They may need assistance in part to help their life run smoothly and to become aware of the different options available to them, but in the end it is they who decide, For people with an intellectual disability itis often someone else who they rely heavily on. Whether itis a family member, the help of a service or an advocate, they do often require assistance. This said; itis also extremely important for their decision when available to be an__ UY integral part of the outcome. ‘The Principal of Normalisation was the first step in seeing the person with a disability as a valued person. It aims to create as normal a life as possible for those with disabilities (Dempsey, 2006). In creating this life for the person the idea was to make them more acceptable to the community. Ifa normal person wears a certain type of clothing, and lives in a certain place then by the person with a disability copying this it should count as a positive that person's life and their experience in the community. The negative side is that people were now in a position to decide what was considered normal. What one person likes does not mean everyone likes, it’s very mueh open to interpretation. Some people with disabilities were refrained from what they really wanted to do because it wasn’t seen as normal, and with this happening infringements on people’s rights were too close to being overlooked. Great changes came about because of the Prineipal of Normalisation; it marked the beginning of the end of institutions, and people started to think, would this situation be appropriate for those without a disability? And if not, why are we allowing it to happen? (Dempsey, 2006), The greatest step made by this theory was that it leads the way to Social Role Valorisation. Wolfensberger created the term Social Role Valorisation. This was an extension to the Principal of Normalisation but it puts more of an emphasis on how the individual is seen by the community (Dempsey, 2006). With this theory the important aspect was not to just get the individual within the community but for them to become an important part of the community. Itis also a necessity for the individual to be happy with their situation and for them to play an integral role in making this theory work. In order for Social Role Valorisation to work it needs to be seen as a guideline to creating an individual plan. As clear as the wording can be it is still possible for people to interpret it incorrectly (Cameron-McGill & van Dam, 1999). This is why it needs to be constantly reviewed to make sure the plan continues to work for the individual. We need to discover ‘which roles are considered as valued in the community before making any placements as these can change from one place to the next. We also need to discover what is available and make sure there is a wide range of options. Where we currently are when it comes to theories on disabilities, and how these affect the services that are on offer, and how the community reacts to those with disabilities is a much better position than where we have previously been. Looking back on the different ups and downs of the disability service it is clear to see we are in the right direction, but still might not be there just yet. These four theoretical frameworks are crucial stepping stones to how far we have come. With each step the community as « whole has been expected to have moreinvolvement in the progress. Not one of them can be seen as completely without fault, yet if ‘we look at a combination of them and take the good from each we ate definitely in a good position to help those with a disability live their life in the least restrictive way possible, and still provide support when needed. References Barnes, C., Mercer, G., & Shakespeare, T. (ND). Enter Disability Theory. In C. Barnes, G. Mercer & T. Shakespeare (Eds.), Exploring Disability: A sociological introduction. Cambridge: Polity Press. Cameron-McGill, F,, & van Dam, T. (1999), Staying True to SRV. 4 paper from the 2nd international Confrence of SRV - Boston 1999 Dempsey, |. (2006). Belief systems and disability services. In I. Dempsey & K. Nankervis (Eds.], Community Disability Services: UNSW Press. Dempsey, |., & Nankervis, K. (2006). Conception of disability. in I. Dempsey & K. Nankervis (Eds.}, Community Disability Services: UNSW Press. O'Brien, P., Newell, C., McEninery, L, & Thesing, A. (2006). Lifting the Silence. In |, Dempsey & K Nankervis (Eds.), Community Disability Services: UNSW Press.1) cold add Score examples. 2) Smee His | have Found cub tet tine problem is seen as Fre struchuwe of sociéky . 3) more detatl of Social Model helping, 4) could reler bo laws or standards Ss > Shan darcls | Jaws,