Emancipatory Disability Research

Historically, disability research has been undertaken on , rather than with disabled people. A medical or individual model of disability, which located the 'problem' in individual disabled people, often underpinned such research (Oliver 1990); thus the focus of traditional (individual model) disability research has been disabled people's individual 'deficit' or difference.

Disability is seen as intrinsically related to a person's impairment. Within these approaches, the experience of disability is seen to stem from the individual, and consequently an individual-blaming philosophy informs research design (Moore et al 1998, p12).

Traditional (individual model) research methodology is both underpinned by, and reinforces, what Michael Oliver (1990) refers to as personal tragedy theory . In addition to influencing research, ideas of personal tragedy also permeate the everyday lives and interactions of disabled people and the social policies (based on individual model research) which are put into place to compensate disabled people 'for the tragedies that have befallen them' (Oliver 1990, p2).

In recent years, numerous disabled and non-disabled activists and academics have criticised the so-called 'neutrality' and 'objectivity' of traditional (individual model) approaches to researching disability. In 1992 Oliver proposed instead an emancipatory research paradigm which is underpinned by a social, rather than an individual model of disability. The social model of disability rests on the original UPIAS (1976) impairment/disability distinction which provides an understanding of disability as socially constructed. Thus, rather than the 'individual-blaming philosophy' of the individual/medical model, the emphasis within the social model of disability is on understanding 'ways in which physical, cultural and social environments exclude or disadvantage people labelled disabled' (Barnes 2003, p5).

The emancipatory research paradigm is openly partisan (Mercer 2002): its focus is on disabling environments or a disabling society; not the individual deficit or 'difference' of disabled people (Oliver 1990; 1992). The challenging of disabling traditional (individual model) academic or 'expert' knowledge about disabled people is an integral part of the emancipatory research process. For Oliver (1992) the research agenda for emancipatory research is: "not the disabled people of the positivist and interpretative research paradigms, but the disablism ingrained in the individualistic consciousness and institutionalised practices of what is, ultimately, a disablist society" (Oliver, 1992, p112).

Both Geof Mercer (2002) and Colin Barnes (2003) trace the development of the emancipatory disability research paradigm to the special issue of the (then entitled) journal Disability, Handicap & Society (Vol. 7 No. 2 1992) in which Oliver's (1992) article appeared; though Barnes (2002, p5) argues that disability activists had been criticising conventional disability research for some time prior to this. Mercer (2002, p232) provides an overview of the development of emancipatory research over the last ten years which suggests an emancipatory disability research model that stresses the following features:

• rejection of the individual model of disability and its replacement by a social model approach:
• concentration on a partisan research approach (so denying researcher objectivity and neutrality) in order to facilitate the political struggles of disabled people;
• reversal of the traditional researcher-researched hierarchy / social relations of research production, while also challenging the material relations of research production;
• pluralism in choice of methodologies and methods (Mercer 2002, p233).

In addition to the above, Barnes (2003) highlights the importance of the transformative potential of emancipatory disability research - that is, the potential of the research to improve the lives of disabled people - and the accountability of researchers to organisations of disabled people (see Politics and ethics of partnership research for more information).

Some authors (for example, Chappell 2000, Walmsley 2001) have questioned the extent to which it is possible for people with learning difficulties to participate in emancipatory disability research; particularly those people identified as having 'severe' or 'profound' learning difficulties. This is one of the reasons why working in partnerships can be a good idea.

However, the challenge of emancipatory disability research (which is itself underpinned by the social model of disability) is to avoid 'individual blaming' and thus to locate any methodological difficulties or 'shortcomings' in approaches to the research, rather than in individual people with learning difficulties.

References

Barnes, C. (2003) What a Difference a Decade Makes: reflections on doing 'emancipatory' disability research, Disability & Society , 18, 1, p3-17.

Chappell, A.L. (2000) Emergence of Participatory Methodology in learning difficulty research: understanding the context, British Journal of Learning Disabilities , 28, p38-43.

Mercer, G. (2002) Emancipatory Disability Research, in Barnes, C., Oliver, M. & Barton, L. (Eds) Disability Studies Today , Cambridge : Polity.

Moore , M., Beazley, S. and Maelzer, J. (1998) Researching Disability Issues , Buckingham: Open University Press.

Oliver, M. (1990) The Politics of Disablement , Basingstoke : Macmillan.

Oliver, M. (1992) Changing the Social Relations of Research Production , Disability, Handicap & Society , 7, 2, p101-114.

UPIAS (1976) Fundamental Principles of Disability , London Union of the Physically Impaired Against Segregation / The Disability Alliance

Walmsley, J. (2001) Normalisation, Emancipatory Research and Inclusive Research in Learning Disability, Disability & Society , 16, 2, p187-205.