Cultures around the world each have their own ideas of what it means to be normal. Deviations from the norm are often seen as inherently wrong or bad in some way. Mental disorders in America are categorized and labeled in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5th Edition and definitions are carefully worded to maintain political correctness. Oftentimes people, or others close to them, adopt their diagnosis as their primary identifier. Concurrently, physical disabilities can become primary labels by people around them. Self-identifying as different based on a disability can be beneficial or problematic depending on the individual and the situation. Research has shown increased poverty rates in people with mental and/or physical disabilities (Weber, 2010). Social reforms have attempted to rectify the inconsistencies with varying success rates. While it is illegal to discriminate based on a laundry list of items, unofficial discrimination does occur within the confines of the law (Weber, 2010). The semantics should be explicated before comparing and contrasting the civil rights and medical models of disability.

The following terms were not even concepts “until 19th century scientific thinking put variations in human function and form into categories of abnormality and deviance” (Wasserman, Asch, Bluestein, & Putnam, 2013). A disability is defined as a “limitation in the ability to pursue an occupation because of physical or mental impairment” (Disability, 2013). While disability is the accepted vernacular for individuals with physical or mental diversity, there is a negative connotation when the word is broken down to its roots. Impaired is defined as “being less than perfect or whole condition” either with alcohol or being “defective” (Impaired, 2013). One of the definitions of defective is “falling below the norm in structure or in mental or physical function” (Defective, 2013). Defective itself is a word often connected with a derogatory context. Despite the negative roots of the word, most people prefer ‘disabled’ over the previously popular and now derogatory term, ‘handicap’. Society would have to constantly develop new words with similar meanings to keep up with not offending people.

Medical Model of Disability

The medical model of disability assumes that a condition of the body or mind is physical and can be treated through medicinal means (The Open University, 2006). The medical model is sometimes referred to as the individual model, because it assumes the individual afflicted with the disability must correct it (Barnes & Mercer, 1997). Techniques used to rehabilitate physical and mental disabilities vary in intensity and administration. People that are not disabled do not often consider the accommodations that would allow people with disabilities to prosper. Additionally, many non-disabled persons do not think about things that are frequently taken for granted, such as walking, seeing, or hearing. The medical model supports the use of medications and medical facilities to treat and/or cure disabilities (The Open University, 2006). The advantages of the medical model are that new medicines are constantly being developed to help people overcome mental or physical ailments. However, the consideration that is not always taken into account is that some people may prefer to be different. For example, someone that has dyslexia might not want to take the strenuous measures to correct it, but instead use alternative methods of learning, such as audio, video, or actively doing something. Another person with dyslexia may envy readers and want to devote hours to learning how to control their reading abilities in order to read their favorite novels. Every person’s experience with a disability is going to be different. If I were in a car accident tomorrow and could never walk again, my chosen form of rehabilitation would be different than another person in the exact same scenario. A disadvantage of the medical model is that it may not take into consideration whether or not a person wants to be rehabilitated, as with the dyslexia example. Similar to the above scenario, a person unable to walk, but that has to potential to walk might enjoy a life in a wheelchair and not want physical therapy that would restore their legs. As an autonomous society, we assume independence is the key goal for everyone in our society. This might lead to forcing disabled people to utilize services they do not necessarily need to survive. Another disadvantage is that the medical model expects each individual with a disability to make their own accommodations and learn to live in a pre-established non-disabled society.

Civil Rights Model of Disability

The civil rights model of disability “looks to anti-discrimination law to remove socially imposed limits on opportunity” (Weber, 2010). The civil rights model is distinguished from the social model of disability because the social model postulates that it is society that creates the disability by blocking people from opportunities and the society must change (Barnes & Mercer, 1997). The civil rights model is similar, however proposes that society must change through legal intervention because of everyone’s right to equal opportunity. Civil rights are rights are often associated with the 14th amendment that “expanded the protection of civil rights to all Americans” and required states to comply (Library of Congress, 2012). Written in 1868, disabled persons were not considered in the implementation of civil rights (Library of Congress, 2012). Therefore, several pieces of legislation since then have been created to remedy the inconsistencies. For example, places with stairs used to be prevalent around America and prevented physically impaired individuals from accessing their facilities. Now, because of the Americans with Disabilities Act, there are ramps on all sidewalks and up to buildings (ADA, 2009). Establishments are also required to reserve closer parking for the disabled and make the necessary accommodations for wheelchairs and walkers (ADA, 2009). The American with Disabilities Act (ADA) “adopts a civil rights approach” and what is does is “legally compel employers, government, and merchants to accommodate people with disabilities” (Weber, 2010). The ADA was supposed to afford the same rights and opportunities to disabled people that everyone else has. In some respects it has been successful, such as wheelchair ramps. However, some argue it has been unsuccessful in getting all people with disabilities out of poverty (Weber, 2010). The World Health Organization reports that approximately “six hundred and fifty million people live with disabilities of various types” and the majority of them are in low-income countries (WHO, 2013). The World Health Organization is attempting to expand the rights that Americans have to other countries around the world. An advantage of the civil rights model of disability is that it advocates for the rights of people with disabilities and is determined to uphold “the civil rights of persons [by] removing attitudinal and environmental barriers and their effects, by legal force if necessary” (Weber, 2010). A disadvantage of the civil rights model is that despite how much legislation is passed, people with disabilities are still not considered equals in society (Weber, 2010).

Comparisons & Contrasts

There are some similarities between the two models. Both the medical and civil rights models have intentions of helping people in the community. Equality and perseverance in a non-disabled society are common to each of the models. While they both have advantages and disadvantages, a combination of the benefits of each would be the most efficient application. One of society’s attempts to bridge the gap between disabled and non-disabled people is by decreasing poverty rates. Programs attempting to provide income for people with disabilities include Supplemental Security Income, Social Security Disability Insurance Program, Home and Community Based Services, and Community Integrated Living Arrangements (Weber, 2010). These are just a few examples of government and state agendas. There are also disability specific programs and another assistance category for grants and services under the Rehabilitation Act, which is federally funded and provides educational and welfare programs (Weber, 2010). Poverty is computed by determining “if [the] total family income is less than the threshold appropriate for that family,” and appropriate thresholds are determined by society (U.S. Census Bureau, 2012). In 2011, the poverty rate in America was 15%, meaning 46.2 million people were in ‘poverty’ (U.S. Census Bureau, 2012).

The major difference between the medical and civil rights models of disability is that the medical model views the disabled person as the problem, and the civil rights model is closer to the social model in that it views society as the problem (The Open University, 2006). While the civil rights model does not expect to society to just change on their own, it argues that legislation will be the tool to guide equality for everyone (Weber, 2010). The medical model on the other hand argues that it should be the responsibility of the individual with the disability to take advantage of the resources available to them and utilize them effectively. The problem with these two different perspectives is that they each make assumptions that cannot be guaranteed. The major assumptions with the medical model are that people want the services, that there is something inherently wrong with disabled people, and that individuals are capable of finding resources that are available to assist them. The main assumptions with the civil rights model is that society is the cultivator of disadvantages to people with disabilities, that legislation will magically fix all of the problems, and that all disable people can be lumped in the category of broken and needing to be helped.

There are societal implications of each model discussed in this paper. The medical model of disability paints the picture that several members of our society are defective and require repair. While the intentions are good, the methods of assistance are stigmatized with handouts and negative implications (Weber, 2010). The natural inference made from the civil rights model is that our society is uncaring, discriminatory, and must be made to comply with accommodations through legal means. Neither of the aforementioned implications are necessarily true or untrue. With the combination of the two models, less easily offended advocates for the rights of people with disabilities, and education nationwide would decrease stigmas attached to poverty, disabilities, and models of disability. Financially and morally it seems logical that accommodations and rehabilitative services should be available to persons with disabilities but not mandatory. To completely exclude an entire group of people because of physical or mental differences would most definitely violate the fourteenth amendment. However, to group ‘the disabled’ into one lump sum of people is not the most effective way to integrate our society into what we like to claim is a land of equal opportunity where anyone can prosper. There are several people that by definition have a disability and function perfectly well if not better than non-disabled persons. The best example of this is Stephen Hawking, who manages to accomplish more in half his lifetime than most could in two lifetimes. He may be the exception to the norm, however, concrete proof that accommodations are not charity and that utilizing resources is not at all demeaning.