Gareth Millward Centre for History in Public Health London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine Simplified Timeline DIG 1965 1995 1990 1985 1980 1975 1970 RADAR CCD BCRD DA BCODP ID: 794490
Download The PPT/PDF document "Disability and Voluntarism 1965 - 1995 ..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Disability and Voluntarism 1965 - 1995 – an effective force in policy making?
Gareth
Millward
Centre for History in Public Health
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
Slide2Simplified Timeline
DIG
1965
1995
1990
1985
1980
1975
1970
RADAR
CCD
BCRD
DA
BCODP
Spastics Society
CS & Disabled Persons Act
Disabled Persons (
SCaR
) Act
Disability Discrimination Act
UPIAS
OPCS Survey
Disabled Persons Act
International Year of Disabled People
CORAD
Civil Rights Bills
Disabled Persons (Employment) Act 1944
SJC
New invalidity benefits
Disability Working and Living Allowances
Rights Now!
SCOPE
Personal Capacity Assessments
Slide3The social model of disability
UPIAS’s
Fundamental Principles (1974)
Disabled People’s International and BCODP (1981)Michael Oliver The Politics of Disablement (1990)
Slide4Medical Model
Medical Condition
Impairment
Handicap
Disability
Adapted from
ICIDH
, WHO, 1980
Impairment
– a functional limitation
Disability – a social function that cannot be performed due to impairmentHandicap
– a social disadvantage suffered due to disability
Slide5Social model
Disability is a social issue
Impairment only becomes disability because society makes it so
A fair society would allow impaired people the same chances to live autonomously as non-impaired people
Slide6Types of Groups
For/of
Individual/FederalCause/Services
Lobbyist/AwarenessImpairment specific/pan impairmentSingle cause/general rights
Slide7For/of
Ind
/Fed
Cause / Services
Lobby / AwareImp / Pan-ImpSingle / General
DIGOfInd
CauseLobbyPan-Imp
SingleDAOf & For
FedCause
LobbyPan-ImpSingle
UPIASFor
IndCause
AwarePan-Imp
GeneralSS / Scope
ForInd
ServicesAware
ImpGeneral
BCODPOf
Fed
CauseAware
Pan-ImpGeneralRADAR
ForFed
Cause/Serv.
LobbyPan-Imp
General
ITA / DDAOf
Ind
CauseLobby
Pan-ImpSingle
Slide8Insider/Outsider
Big charities – definitely “in”, but not actively attempting to adjust conceptions of disability
DIG, DA, RADAR – “experts”BCODP – not in, though perhaps not trying?
Slide9The role of individuals
A small network of agitators, highly skilled and highly motivated.
Personal relationships important in discussions between “offices”
However – also very similar demographics. A certain “type” of disabled person.
Slide10Some disabled individuals...
Org
Imp.
Edu.
CareerMegan du BoissonDIGMS
GoodMary GreavesDIG / CCD / RADAR
? – wheelchairPG equiv.Civil service, economist
Peter LargeDIG / RADAR / ADPTeenager – polioUni
Civil serviceBert MassieRADAR et alBaby – polio
UniPro. CampaignerPeter MitchellRADAR
PolioGoodCampaigner
Denny DenlyDDA
PolioGoodArmy, campaigner
Stephen BradshawSIASpinal injuryGood
Vic FinkelsteinUPIAS
Spinal injuryPG equiv.Academic
Mike OliverBCODP? –
wheelchairPG equiv.Academic
Slide11Networks
Jack Ashley
Victoria Scott
Nicholas Scott
DIG
Mary Greaves
Peter Townsend
DHSS
RADAR
DA
Alf Morris
APDG
Peter Mitchell
Peter Large
Slide12Unity?
Late 60s – Early 70s – Incomes
Later 80s – Early 90s – Civil RightsThe rest?
Publications from DA and RADAR
Slide13Effective?
Kingdon
(1984) and “policy streams”
Politics
Problem
Solution
Adapted from
Buse
, Mays, Walt,
Making Health Policy
(2005)
Policy Window
Slide14Effective?
Excellent manipulation of “problem” and “politics”
Poor at influencing “solution”
The Times
, 15th November 1971, p. 1.
Slide15Voluntary organisations “discovered” disability for the government
However, social model – rights – is not a measurable legal tool
But “need” can be measured – if functional limitations are equated with
“need”
http://www.crippencartoons.co.uk
Slide16Outcome Examples
DDA employment sections did not apply to businesses employing fewer than 20 people
New capacity tests looked at medically ascertainable functional limitations – not disease nomenclature
Benefits paid more equally based on need – but still at levels far too low to alleviate poverty
Slide17Conclusions...
Style, type, aims and background of both individuals and organisations
The networks – how, why and when interactions take placeTimes of unity, broadly times of change
Extent, scope and efficiency of said change more problematic
Slide18Thanks!