Thank you for joining me on my CPACC journey! In this series, I’ll be reviewing the exam topics and resources I used to study, following the updated 2023 IAAP Body of Knowledge (BOK).
The first topic in the Disabilities, Challenges, and Assistive Technologies domain of the exam is Theoretical Models of Disability.
Domain One A: Characterize and Differentiate Between Theoretical Models of Disability, including the strengths and weaknesses of their underlying assumptions.
No model of disability provides a comprehensive perspective, and each has strengths and weaknesses to consider. Theoretical models of disability provide consistent frameworks through which to understand and discuss disability.
Theoretical Models of Disability
- Identify prominent theoretical models of disability.
- Describe their basic concepts, and understand their strengths and weaknesses.
- Identify which models align most closely with the principles of accessibility and universal design.
- Apply the models to example scenarios in the lives of people with disabilities.
Medical Model
The medical model of disability treats disabilities as problems that exist in a disabled person’s body, often requiring medical intervention to “fix” the problem. These problems involve a medical diagnosis and can be caused by genetics, disease, trauma, or other health conditions. Management of the disability is aimed at medical care, and most legal definitions of disabilities use the medical model.
A strength of this model is the definition of a biological condition and criteria that assist medical professionals in diagnosis and treatment. However, the medical model is frequently criticized due to overlooking the social and physical design barriers that exist for people with disabilities. Also, using strict medical definitions can add complexity and bureaucracy to situations and unintentionally exclude people whose disabilities don’t meet predefined criteria.
Social Model
The social model of disability highlights that society creates disabling conditions, not the person themselves. This model distinguishes between impairment and disability. A disability occurs because of a lack of fit between the person and their environment. To a large extent, a disability is an avoidable condition caused by poor design – although there may be medical or biological components to a person’s disability or impairment, more inclusive design can remove barriers disabled people may face. Disability management is not entirely the responsibility of the individual; rather, the responsibility lies with society at large to make modifications to the environment and enact social change.
A strength of this model is the empowerment it gives to both groups of people: it empowers those with disabilities by removing some of the stigma often associated with these impairments, and it empowers designers of virtual and physical spaces to consider usability for a broad range of humans and conditions. However, the social model may fail to account for the full context of the physical reality of many disabilities.
Biopsychosocial Model
In 2002, the World Health Organization (WHO) published the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). The ICF integrates the social and medical models. The WHO describes the biopsychosocial model as:
“A better model of disability, in short, is one that synthesizes what is true in the medical and social models, without making the mistake each makes in reducing the whole, complex notion of disability to one of its aspects. This more useful model of disability might be called the biopsychosocial model. ICF is based on this model, an integration of medical and social. ICF provides, by this synthesis, a coherent view of different perspectives of health: biological, individual and social.”
Economic Model
The economic model of disability is defined by a person’s ability – or inability – to participate in work. It also considers how impairment affects an individual’s productivity and especially, the economic consequences for the individual, employer, and the government. These consequences may include loss of earnings for the individual, lower profit margins for the employer, and welfare payments from the government.
Strengths of the economic model include the effect of bodily limitations on a person’s ability to work, and the need for economic support and/or accommodations for the person’s disability. However, this model creates a legally defined category of people and their needs, which can be stigmatizing for people with disabilities. Also, if a person doesn’t meet the legal threshold for disability, or if there is a dispute about the nature of a person’s disability, the person with the disability may not receive the support they need.
Functional Solutions Model
The functional solutions model of disability is a perspective that identifies the limitations (or “functional impairments”) due to disability, with the intent to create and promote practical yet innovative solutions to overcome those limitations. The primary task is to eliminate, or at least reduce, the impact of the functional limitations of the body through technological or methodological innovation. The pragmatism of the functional solution model de-emphasizes the sociopolitical aspects of disability, and instead prioritizes inventiveness and entrepreneurship.
The strongest aspect of this model is that it focuses on results. It seeks to provide solutions to real-world challenges, while sometimes de-emphasizing the challenges of disability within society. However, when new technologies are involved, profit-driven enterprises can sometimes miss the mark, creating products that may be innovative but not practical or useful, or which may be of more benefit to the inventors than to the target population. This is especially pronounced if the proposed solutions are expensive. Also, the functional solutions model’s de-emphasis on socioeconomic issues can cause would-be innovators to ignore important aspects of the original problem.
Social Identity or Cultural Affiliation Model
The social identity or cultural affiliation model describes a disabled person as deriving their personal identity from membership within a group of like-minded individuals. This model is most evident among people who are Deaf, because of their shared linguistic experience as users of sign languages. For example, Deaf culture and identity can be strong, due to the exclusive nature of being a part of a close-knit linguistic minority. Other people with disabilities may also feel a sense of belonging to a community with common life experiences, challenges, and interests.
The greatest strength of the social identity or cultural affiliation model is accepting the person’s disability completely and using it as a point of pride in being associated with other people in similar conditions. However, the sense of belonging felt by one group of people can be counterbalanced by a feeling of exclusion by people who don’t fit into a group’s expectations.
Charity Model
The charity model regards people with disabilities as less fortunate and in need of assistance from the outside. Providers of such charity are viewed as benevolent contributors to a needy, underserved population.
A strength of the charity model is that it can inspire people to contribute their time and/or resources to provide assistance when it is genuinely needed. However, the charity model can be condescending toward people with disabilities, who may resent the feeling that they are pitied by other people, and that they must continually depend on accepting this pity. The charity model also focuses on short-term, immediate needs, often at the expense of more comprehensive and more effective long-term solutions.
In Practice
In practice, organizations generally make use of multiple models, particularly the medical and social models.
Imagine a person in a wheelchair wanting to access a building with steps to reach the entrance. The medical model would say the wheelchair, or the person’s disability, is the problem in this situation. The social model of disability would say the steps (or the lack of a more inclusive design, like a ramp) are the problem.
Sources and Further Reading
- IAAP CPACC Body of Knowledge (BOK) PDF link
- IAAP CPACC Certification Content Outline
- View my Quizlet study set for Theoretical Models of Disability
- World Health Organization (WHO): Disability
- World Health Organization (WHO): International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health
- Lawson J. (2001). Disability as a Cultural Identity. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 11(3), 203-222. https://doi.org/10.1080/09620210100200076
- Goering S. (2015). Rethinking Disability: the Social Model of Disability and Chronic Disease. Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine, 8(2), 134–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12178-015-9273-z
- Dirth T. and Branscombe N. (2018). The Social Identity Approach to Disability: Bridging Disability Studies and Psychological Science. American Psychological Association Psychological Bulletin, 144(12), 1300-1324. https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/features/bul-bul0000156.pdf