NEN Explain: What is the Medical and Social Model of Disability?

The Social Model of Disability

The social model of disability explains that people are not disabled by their impairments or differences, but by the barriers that exist in society. These barriers can be physical, such as buildings without ramps or lifts; attitudinal, such as negative stereotypes or prejudice; or organisational, such as rigid school systems that do not allow for individual needs. The social model focuses on changing society rather than changing the person. It suggests that when barriers are removed, disabled people can live independently, make choices, and take part fully in everyday life. For example, if a child who uses a wheelchair cannot get into a classroom because there are stairs, the social model would say that the problem is not with the child’s impairment, but with the lack of accessibility. By building a ramp or lift, the barrier is removed and the child is included. The social model encourages inclusion, equality, and respect for difference.

Characteristics of the social model:

Focus on inclusion: Encourages society to remove barriers that prevent participation.
Empowerment: Promotes independence, choice, and equality for disabled people.
Environmental responsibility: Sees disability as a result of how society is organised, not a personal fault.

The social model of disability is an idea developed by disabled people to explain that disability is not caused by a person’s impairment, but by the barriers that exist within society (Vickerman, 2020). These barriers include physical obstacles such as stairs and narrow doorways, as well as attitudinal and organisational barriers, like negative assumptions about ability or inflexible teaching methods. The social model focuses on changing society and the environment, rather than trying to “fix” the individual.

According to this model, impairment and disability are two separate ideas. An impairment is a person’s physical, mental, or sensory difference — for example, hearing loss, visual impairment, or a long-term health condition. Disability, however, is something a person experiences when society fails to remove barriers that stop them from taking part fully in life. For instance, if a person using a wheelchair cannot access a classroom because of stairs, the problem is not their impairment but the lack of accessibility.

The social model highlights how society can discriminate against and exclude disabled people by creating unnecessary barriers (Vickerman, 2020). Its main goal is to remove these barriers so that disabled people can live independently, make choices, and have control over their lives (Disability Nottinghamshire, 2019). This model has been recommended by the UK Government Equalities Office for use across departments because it helps promote inclusion and equality.

The UK social model of disability was also pivotal in the disability rights movement, empowering disabled people to speak out against inequality and take control of the political conversation around disability. It fuelled major political and legislative changes, leading to key laws such as the Disability Discrimination Act (2005) and later the Equality Act (2010). These pieces of legislation made it illegal to discriminate against people based on disability and placed a legal duty on organisations, including schools, to make reasonable adjustments to ensure accessibility and inclusion. This marked a significant shift from seeing disabled people as passive recipients of care to recognising them as active citizens with rights.

In education, the social model has had a powerful influence. It encourages teachers and schools to focus on inclusion by adapting the learning environment to meet every child’s needs. For example, teachers can provide materials in accessible formats, adjust classroom layouts, and challenge negative attitudes about disability. This ensures all children are treated fairly and supported to achieve their full potential.

However, there are criticisms of the social model. One limitation is that it focuses mainly on physical disabilities, often overlooking mental health conditions or cognitive impairments. People with invisible or fluctuating impairments may not fit neatly into the model’s definitions, meaning their experiences of discrimination are sometimes excluded. Critics such as Wendell (1996) also point out that defining disability is a social process involving power, some people who see themselves as disabled are not always recognised as such by professionals or society. While the model has been an effective political tool, it needs to be expanded to include a wider range of experiences and to strengthen its explanatory power.

Comparing the UK, Nordic, and North American Social Models of Disability

The UK social model of disability is often described as rigid because it focuses mainly on oppression as the cause of disability. It strongly separates impairment (a physical or mental condition) from disability (the social barriers caused by society). This clear division has helped challenge discrimination and drive legal reform, but it can be too narrow to capture the full complexity of disabled people’s lived experiences.

In contrast, the Nordic social model of disability developed from the 1960s onwards and takes a salutogenic approach, focusing on health and well-being rather than illness or deficit (Söder, 1982). The Nordic model views disability as existing on a continuum rather than as something fixed. It recognises that impairment and disability interact with one another, rather than being completely separate (Berg, 2002). However, it still tends to view disabled people as less able to perform social roles in the same way as non-disabled people. The Nordic model is often considered the most complete “model” because it explores the relationship between the individual and their environment and explains how they interact.

The North American social model of disability is closely linked to the civil rights movement of the 1960s. It takes a rights-based approach, focusing on equality, inclusion, and fighting segregation and discrimination. Unlike the UK model, which concentrates on social oppression, the North American approach focuses more on individual rights and identity, viewing disabled people as a minority group who should have equal access to opportunities. However, like the UK model, it does not always make a clear distinction between impairment and disability.

The Medical Model of Disability

The medical model of disability views disability as a problem within the individual. It focuses on the person’s impairment or medical condition and aims to “fix” or “treat” it so that they can live as normally as possible. This model sees disability as something that needs to be cured or managed, rather than something that society should adapt to. The medical model often overlooks the role that the environment or attitudes play in creating barriers. For instance, if a child cannot get into a classroom because of stairs, the medical model would view the child’s mobility difficulty as the issue and might focus on physical therapy or medical treatment to help the child walk, rather than changing the building. This approach can lead to low expectations and less independence, as it places the responsibility on the individual to adapt instead of asking society to change.

Characteristics of the medical model:

Individual focus: Views disability as a personal or medical problem to be fixed.
Emphasis on treatment: Aims to cure or manage impairments through medical intervention.
Limited inclusion: Does not consider how the environment or attitudes can create barriers.

The medical model of disability is based on the idea that disability is a problem within the individual, caused by their impairment or medical condition. In this model, the focus is on what is wrong with a person rather than on how society can adapt to include them. Disabled people are seen as needing to change, adapt, or be “fixed” so that they can fit into the world as it already exists, rather than expecting society to change to meet their needs.

This model reflects the World Health Organisation (2019) definition of disability, which focuses on how a person’s medical condition limits their ability to access services, activities, and opportunities. The emphasis is on the person’s biological or physical condition, not on the social, environmental, or attitudinal barriers that might restrict them. In other words, where the social model says people are disabled by the way society is organised, the medical model says people are disabled by their impairment itself.

Under the medical model, the aim is often to treat, cure, or manage the impairment so that it causes as little difference from “normal” as possible. This might involve surgery, therapy, or medication, even when the impairment does not cause pain or illness. The model looks at what is wrong with the person, rather than what they need to live a fulfilling life. As a result, it can lead to low expectations, loss of independence, and reduced choice and control for disabled people (Disability Nottinghamshire, 2022).

In schools and early years settings, this approach can result in disabled children being labelled according to their condition rather than being valued for their individual strengths and abilities. Labels can lead to stigma, and teachers may hold lower expectations of children with disabilities. This can reduce teacher confidence and sometimes lead to discriminatory practices, such as segregated schooling or the assumption that disabled children should be educated separately from their peers. The medical model also focuses heavily on within-child explanations for learning and behaviour, often ignoring the role that teaching methods, school environments, or wider social issues play in shaping outcomes.

However, it is important to recognise that diagnosis and labelling can also have positive effects, especially when used appropriately. For some children with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND), having a diagnosis can bring understanding, access to support, and even a sense of identity and empowerment. For example, children diagnosed with ADHD may benefit from replacing damaging moral labels such as “naughty” with an explanation that reduces blame (Sjöberg & Dahlbeck, 2018). Similarly, a dyslexia diagnosis can help struggling readers reclaim confidence and view themselves as capable learners (Elliott, 2020; Snowling, 2019). Many young people who identify as neurodiverse wear their diagnosis as a badge of pride, helping them to advocate for their rights and needs (Children’s Commissioner, 2024).

The origins of the medical model can be traced back to the mid-1950s when Dr. Thomas Szasz coined the term to criticise psychiatry’s growing practice of classifying mental conditions as illnesses (Hogan, 2019). Szasz argued that this approach pathologised natural human behaviour and created artificial categories of “normal” and “abnormal” to enforce social order. Historically, the medical model has been used to sort people into these categories, often restricting access to education, work, and community life for those labelled as “abnormal.” This approach supported the segregation of disabled people in special schools or institutions, limiting their opportunities for inclusion and equality.

Critics also argue that the medical model can absolve society and institutions of responsibility. By locating disability within the individual, it ignores the role of social, political, and economic factors, such as austerity, school funding, and public policy, in shaping people’s experiences of disability (Warnock, 2023). In education, this means that schools might focus only on treating a child’s condition rather than creating an environment that supports diverse learners.

Reference

Disability Nottingham,. 2022. Social Model vs Medical Model of Disability. England: Disability. Available at: https://www.disabilitynottinghamshire.org.uk/index.php/about/social-model-vs-medical-model-of-disability/[Date Accessed 28/11/2022]

Vickerman, P,. 2011. Models of Disability and Special Educational Needs. Sage. London.