Social Construct of Disability
As noted above, WHO emphasized the influence of society on the construct of disability. Some
have argued that societal influences are the most important factor in defining disability (Asch, 1984;
Marks, 1999). As Marks (1999) proposed: “The social model . . . locates disability not in an impaired
or malfunctioning body, but in an excluding and oppressive social environment” (p. 79). Restrictions in
participation due to disability such as a person in a wheelchair not being able to enter a building, a person
who is deaf unable to understand a movie, or a qualified person who is blind unable to gain employment
are a product of social and environmental barriers rather than the disability itself. Clearly, in these
examples individuals would not be restricted if the building was accessible, if the movie had
closed-captioning, or if the employer was not prejudiced.
Sherrill (1997) noted that societal influences shape how individuals construct their disability and
in turn how they perceive themselves. In other words, self-esteem of individuals with disabilities is
shaped by attitudes, beliefs, practices, and policies of society. She further noted that these social
influences can occur at the macro (governmental, societal, cultural) and micro (individual interactions)
levels. For example, Casey Martin, the golfer who sued and recently won a ruling against the PGA tour
so that he can ride a golf cart to accommodate his disability (Lane, 2001), has to deal with social
influences at the macro level (Federal law, how the law is interpreted, the PGA tour, how society feels
about the issue) and the micro level (how players who he interacts with daily feel about him, what they
say to him, and how they treat him).
There are many specific social factors that can affect whether or not individuals with disabilities
are included or excluded from participation in various activities, which in turn will affect development of
self-esteem. These factors often begin with simple ambivalence towards a person with a disability, but
ambivalence can lead to stereotyping, stigmatization, and even prejudice and discrimination (Sherrill,
1997). We review each of these social factors that can affect self-esteem.
Ambivalence. Many people simply do not know what to make of individuals with disabilities.
They immediately see differences, and these differences make them feel uncomfortable. Some have
argued that most people without disabilities are not necessarily prejudiced against people with disabilities;
rather, they just feel uncomfortable and even fearful when around someone who is so different than they
are (Henderson & Bryan, 1997; Katz, 1981). The lack of factual information about a particular disability
leads to further anxiety and withdrawal. Thus, people without disabilities have mixed feelings when they
encounter a person with disabilities. On the one hand they are probably curious about the person, what is
the exact nature of their disability, when did it happen, how did it happen, do they need help doing things,
do they work, etc. On the other hand, there is a sense of uneasiness and even fear. Is the person’s
condition contagious, is the person in pain, is the person depressed with his/her condition, what if I was in
a wheelchair someday, should I offer to help the person, should I stare at the person or look away, should
I talk to the person, etc.? Because of this ambivalence, individuals with disabilities are often ignored and
disregarded that in turn can affect how an individual feels about him/herself (Sherrill, 1997). If, for
example, peers never ask a teenager with a disability to go to watch a ball game or go the park to toss a
ball around, then this teenager may begin to develop a lower self-esteem.
Stereotyping. Part of ambivalence is not knowing much about a person with a disability. With
more direct interactions, persons without disabilities usually begin to see the person with disabilities as an
individual with many unique characteristics. On the other hand, without direct contact, some persons
without disabilities may begin to form their own opinions about a person with a disability. These
opinions may be based on a global view of disability. Unfortunately, one of the most prominent social
factors that affects an individual’s self-esteem is that many people simply lump all people with disabilities
into one category (Sherrill, 1997). Rather than looking at each person’s own unique characteristics,
abilities, and disabilities, many people simply focus on one prominent attribute - a person’s disability
(Asch, 1984). This stereotyping or generalization is often an unfair characterization of the person with a
disability. Not all people in wheelchairs are alike, not all people with mental retardation are alike, and
not all people who are blind are alike.
Some stereotyping goes farther and casts all people with disabilities into one, minority category.
For example, some people without disabilities assume that Special Olympics serves all people with
disabilities. The fact is that Special Olympics is for individuals with mental retardation while other
sports organizations serve other disability groups (e.g., United States Association for Blind Athletes,
United States Cerebral Palsy Athletic Association, American Athletic Association of the Deaf). Sherrill
(1997) noted that this type of stereotyping is an antecedent to the development of social minority status.
Uniqueness is devalued, and one, shared attribute (i.e., having a disability) is accentuated. Just like
racial, ethnic, and gender minorities, self-concept of people with disabilities may be shaped by their
minority status (Marks, 1999).
Stigmatization. Stereotyping a person with a disability can lead to stigmatization.
Stigmatization can be defined as discriminatory or unfair treatment towards a person or group of persons
believed to be different (Crocker & Major, 1989; Sherrill, 1997). Stigma results when the focus is on
one attribute of an individual or group of individuals that is perceived to be different, undesirable, a
shortcoming, or a handicap. For example, stigma may result if the owner of a bowling alley doesn’t
allow a group of adults with mental retardation to join a local bowling league simply because they have
mental retardation. The owner focused on the single attribute of mental retardation, and this attribute
(and the adults with this attribute) is viewed negatively resulting in stigma. Sherrill (1997) noted that
three factors contribute to stigmatization: (a) fear of the person who is different, (b) associating
differences with inferiority and/or danger, and (c) belief that the person is not quite human and thus does
not require the same level of respect given to others. Sherrill (1986) reported that most athletes with
disabilities who she interviewed described examples of stigmatization which led to discrimination such as
different treatment, being ignored and subjected to lower expectations. Similarly, Blinde and
McCallister (1998) found that children with physical disabilities were stigmatized by their general
physical education teachers, resulting in being excused from physical education, sitting out and watching,
keeping score, and being given lesser roles in activities. Interestingly, Taub, Blinde, and Greer (1999)
found that selected male college students believed that participation in sport and physical activity,
demonstration of physical skill, and a fit, healthy body may be effective ways of dispelling stigma and
creating an alternative, positive view of individuals with disabilities.
Prejudice and Discrimination. Stigmatization of persons with disabilities can lead to prejudice
and discrimination. Prejudice (inaccurate beliefs or attitudes) and discrimination (acting on these
inaccurate beliefs or attitudes) can prevent individuals with disabilities from participating in sports
(Sherrill, 1997). For example, a nine-year-old with cerebral palsy (he used a walker) was not allowed to
play in his community soccer program (discrimination) because the commissioner of the league felt that
he would be a danger to others (prejudice). The courts determined that under the Americans with
Disabilities Act the league must make reasonable accommodations for this child (Boyd, 1999).
Similarly, the NCAA was forced to change its policies (discrimination) towards athletes with learning
disabilities. The NCAA had not accepted high school coursework that was specifically designed for
students with learning disabilities, because the NCAA thought those courses were not rigorous enough
(prejudice) (Department of Justice, 2000).
In summary, it appears that persons with disabilities often face ambivalence, stereotyping,
stigmatization, and discrimination. These negative reactions to disability are directed more towards
misconceptions and misinformation about disability rather than a true reflection of any one individual’s
abilities and attributes. Fortunately, positive examples of people with disabilities such as the actor
Christopher Reeves and favorable images of Special Olympians and Paraolympians are slowly changing
these misconceptions. In addition, federal laws such as the Americans with Disabilities Act are
preventing wholesale discrimination. Nevertheless, stereotyping and discrimination still exists, and these
negative reactions towards an individual with a disability affects how that person feels about him/herself.