Is there something wrong with society, or is it just me? Social and medical knowledge in a Norwegian anti-discrimination law

Jan Grue

doi:10.1080/15017410903338853

Abstract

What is the current relationship between the social and medical definitions of disability in Norway? The Norwegian Discrimination and Accessibility Act, which entered into effect on 1 January 2009, frames its overarching goals in terms of human rights and equal opportunity and studiously avoids the use of medico-diagnostic language. Most of the specific provisions of the law are, however, justified as means of compensation for inherent or pre-existing disadvantage due to impairment. In order to be effective, they must engage with medical, impairment-specific knowledge. Social and medical perspectives and explanatory models that are often seen as conflicting or even mutually exclusive instead become intertwined in the spaces of negotiation that are opened by the law. Thus, elements of what has traditionally been termed the medical model become integrated in a larger framework that is defined by the goals of the social model.

Highlights

Jan Grue*Faculty of Health Sciences, Oslo University College, Oslo, Norway (Received 2 February 2009; accepted 18 August 2009)
The modern state has traditionally viewed disabled people as passive victims of personal tragedies, fit mainly for medical intervention or institutionalization (Oliver 1990)
One way of rephrasing this question is to ask how the provision of equal opportunity for people with impairments in Norwegian society is tied to discourses that originate outside the disability field Á in architecture, in public works, in the health professions, etc

Summary

Jan Grue*

Faculty of Health Sciences, Oslo University College, Oslo, Norway (Received 2 February 2009; accepted 18 August 2009). What is the current relationship between the social and medical definitions of disability in Norway? The Norwegian Discrimination and Accessibility Act, which entered into effect on 1 January 2009, frames its overarching goals in terms of human rights and equal opportunity and studiously avoids the use of medicodiagnostic language. Most of the specific provisions of the law are, justified as means of compensation for inherent or pre-existing disadvantage due to impairment. In order to be effective, they must engage with medical, impairment-specific knowledge. Elements of what has traditionally been termed the medical model become integrated in a larger framework that is defined by the goals of the social model.

Introduction

Direct discrimination

Marginalizing medical knowledge

Building new arenas for negotiation

Findings

The public disabled identity