Lina Navickaitė
SDbd7.02
Sociological Theories of Disability
Disability is the experience which cannot be really understood without thinking about it from
the broader perspective, and that means that it should be analyzed while using sociological theories.
Moreover, as disability is in fact perceived as the state being caused by society, not by the personal
disadvantages, the importance of looking towards it through the sociological perspective becomes
even more evident.
While talking about society and disability, the idea that all so called normal attitudes and
stereotypes are actually formed by the society (Barnes et al, 1999, p. 13) becomes important.
Furthermore, as this being “natural and normal” actually is sociological product, it is the same with
disability as well. As stated by Barnes et al (1999, p. 14), the meaning of disability also varies and
depends upon social and ethical backgrounds in which the disabled individual happens to exist. The
impact of societal attitudes on the self-esteem and sense of well being of the disabled is revealed by
French (1994, cit. from Swain et al, 2004, p. 34), who says that the expectations to be “normal” and
“the same as everyone is” in fact disable, not the impairment itself. Moreover, as disabled people
could never be “normal” (according to the ideology of normality), these expectations that cannot be
fulfilled really make feel under pressure and that is why it might cause many undesired
consequences, such as low self-esteem or even unhappiness.
What is more, as long as the notions of ‘able-bodied” and/or “normality” are considered to be
the virtues (Barnes et al, 1999, p. 64), the self-identity of disabled people becomes blurring. Talking
about the identity of the disabled, a few contradictions appear. First of all, disabled people argue that
their identity cannot be decided just by taking into consideration their bodily differences. Identity
also depends upon such dimensions as ethnicity, sexuality, personal relationships and so on
(Shakespeare and Watson, 2001, cit. from Hammell, 2006, p. 49). However, the notion of the lived
body is widely used while talking about the experience of disability, and it claims that the triad of
self, body and the surrounding world is inseparable while understanding the relations between the
individual and his/her environment (Toombs, 1995, cit. from Hammell, 2006, p. 106-107). Also, the
idea of the lived body means that any disruptions happening in one of the parts of the
body/self/world triad alter the remaining parts as well. So this means that if the body is disrupted, the
self is harmed as well, and this in fact proves that when becoming disabled, the inner world and
identity inevitably change.
The relations between body and self as well as their meaning to self-identity have just been
discussed, but the way how the forms of societal organizations affect disability experience must be
mentioned as well. As Ingstad and Whyte state (1995, cit. from Barnes et al, 1999, p. 16), there are
three main ways how the disability experience is influenced by the forms of organizations which are
prevalent in the society. First of all, the question whether the family is able to take care of its
disabled member arises. As the case of disability in the family actually grows the economic pressure,
this encourages the provision for the impaired family member. Furthermore, the question of
occupation of disabled people also occurs. As it is suggested by Ingstad and Whyte (1995, cit. from
Barnes et al, 1999, p. 16), the more complex labor market, the more difficulties the disabled find
while trying to find the job. Having in mind the complexity of current structure of labor markets, this
in fact becomes a big problem for disabled people. Last but not least, the role of the helping
institutions and organizations that care about the making the life of disabled people easier is also
important. The more such institutions exist, the more options for the disabled to choose the preferred
way of living. All in all, it is evident that there are many societal factors influencing the disability
experience.
The two approaches that will be discussed in this section concentrate more on the on the
relations between the disabled and society, and what influence those relationships and attitudes that
disabled people and the society itself have towards disability. Sick role behavior pays more attention
to the way how disabled people feel about themselves and their impairment, whereas labeling theory
explains why society characterizes people with disabilities mostly by stigmatizing them
The sick role behavior is the term that Parsons (cit. from Barnes et al, 1999, p. 40-41) used in
explaining how the social order of the society is maintained. According to him, so as to keep the
stable organization of society, all the individuals must properly conduct their social roles. As
illnesses and disability are thought to be “abnormal” conditions of human-being, they undoubtedly
stop the individual from conducting the roles he/she had, and, at the same time, put a few new
responsibilities and rights for the sick or disabled individual. First of all, the individual must fully
co-operate with the doctors and other professionals. Then, they are supposed to see their
illness/disability as morally bad or undesired, and this is for sure is the characteristics of the personal
tragedy theory. What is more, when diagnosed, individuals might feel less responsible for the roles
they had before as well as they might not think to be able to affect the illness, so just relies on
professionals.
Even though this sick role behavior is sometimes said to be connected just with the acute
illnesses, Kassenbaum and Baumann (1965, cit. from Barnes et al, 1999, p. 41) have arguments why
it might be applied for the disabled or chronically ill people as well. They claim that having
disability or chronic illness in fact might cause the way of thinking that illness/disability is the part
of “normal existence”, which means that those limited functions have already been internalized, and
this leads to the social dependence upon the help and support that is supplied by others. Moreover,
the impairment becomes the main character of self-identity that the disabled people have, and this
leads to the loss of motivation to control and shape the life to the desired direction.
As the sick role behavior concentrated more on the way how disabled people feel about
themselves, labeling theory explains how society perceive the disabled and disability itself. The
hallmark of the theory is the process of stigmatization, which at first was explained by Goffman
(1968, cit. from Barnes et al, p. 42-47). Stigmatization means that the ones who are thought to be
“different” or “abnormals”, especially by the way the ideology of normality defines what is normal
and what is not, might be excluded from the society by putting stigma on them.
Moreover, labeling theory also explains the way how those stigmatized individuals cope with
their stigma, and this could be done by using three strategies, according to Goffman. First, it can be
done through the process which is called “passing” and this means that the information that might be
perceived as discredited (especially when impairment is not visible) is just kept in secret and not
shown for everyone. Moreover, the second strategy is called “covering”, which is applied when the
stigmatizing factor is known or visible for others, but it is tried to be made more “normal” or
common so as to not overwhelm others. Last but not least, the most radical strategy is “withdrawal”,
and it means that the disabled individual just prevents any activities with the “normal” ones so as not
to feel discriminated or undervalued.
To sum up, after discussing those two approaches towards disability, especially having in mind
the labeling theory, it becomes obvious that the society plays an important role in shaping the way
how the disabled feel about themselves and how they act so as to be included in the social life.
List of references
1. Barnes C & Mercer G. & Shakespeare T. (1999) Exploring disability. A
sociological introduction. Polity Press.
2. Hammell K. (2006) Perspectives on disability and rehabilitation. Contesting
assumptions, challenging practice. Elsevier.
3. Swain, J. & Finkelstein, V. & French, S. & Oliver, M. (Eds.) (2004) Disabling
barriers, enabling environments. Sage.