To feel the ‘social model of disability’ is being used against me?

[Ungratefulorwhat]

Short version:
In education and work the words ‘social model of disability is trotted out at me a lot.
I’m being told that because adjustments (quite often the wrong ones) have been made, I’m “no longer disabled by impairment.” And “adjustments have already been made for you.”
So, I’m now not struggling because I’m disabled, just not good enough because I’m ‘impaired’ and that isn’t covered by the DDA?

With PIP and ESA I’m being told that as I’ve been awarded disability aids and a carer “Obviously the effects of your disabilities are now considerably reduced.” This seems to be relying on the same ‘social model.’
Absolutely they’re reduced, from unable to do everything, to unable to do quite enough to please anyone.

Is this a flaw in the ‘social model,’ it being abused, or something else?

Interesting, thanks for posting. I don’t know anything about this. It seems obvious to me that unless it’s a motorised wheelchair, it’s not really possible to move around much, you’d have to be incredibly fit and athletic to do so.

I have long-term chronic illness that impacts my energy levels significantly. There’s no help for me. At the moment I just muddle through working part-time, underemployed, and on those days I can’t do anything else at all, sometimes even feed myself. It’s not a life and at my worst my significant skills and training were wasted, I had to leave an in-demand/shortage profession. I’m better than I used to be though, and hoping to work in a less ridiculous profession in future.

The human is gone out of these systems. It’s awful.

I realize it's too late now, but surely the cheap and cheerful answer would be change, or let me change, the workstation legs so i wasn't getting injuries in the first place, rather than have someone who could stand and frequently alter their position (so not suffer injury) be instructed by me to do the job..

Hi OP, I would disagree that the social model is to blame here. The approach they are taking doesn't appear to be the social model OP, its the medical model. They seem to be misunderstanding it, or perhaps you yourself are.
I'm disabled and a disability awareness trainer.
for those who don't know, there's the medical model of disability and the social model of disability.
The medical model of disability is like disability is a problem to be fixed eg by giving you a wheelchair, hearing aids, medication, and yes these are good things but you're still disabled.
How? By society. If you can't watch the coronation, is it because you are deaf or blind or because there are no captions, no BSL, or no audio description?
The social model says the latter.
You can be disabled by your environment or by attitudes. You are still disabled because the negative attitudes are still there, you are likely still going to experience barriers to travel, to employment, to promotion etc.
The issue here is not the approach, it is how that approach is interpreted.

LangClegsInSpace Thank you for breaking that down! They've been using this 'social model' to say that I have an impairment, and society then disables me, and they have addressed the disability part of it, so we're just down to me being impaired causing problems.

No reason at all not to change legs on workstation, other that 'we have these three heights' two are disability heights, so you've had reasonable adjustments.

no occupational health, no union.

Education lot doing something almost identical, both referring to social model.

I didn't include this in my OP as I wanted to look at this whole 'social model of disability' stuff, but having damaged myself using the workstation, I've been told I have to get myself a fit note, and sign on to UC for now. (they are going to use the person they had me instruct!)

I suspect I'm about to lose the work, and am about to go through the whole ESA journey all over again under the UC rules, and after my last experiencing of "obviously the effects of your disabilities are now considerably reduced" because you have this equipment and help, am very worried, and trying to understand what exactly is going on with it all.

Really what they should be doing is listening and being led by you, not telling you what you need and exactly how helpful it must be for you.

The table seems to be your biggest bugbear, is that right? I think you have to just put your foot down and say you NEED this and keep politely insisting that the alternative doesn't work for you.

I was just saying the other day on a thread, that I'd been reading an interview with travel presenter Ade Adepitan who is in a wheelchair and he was saying the lengths he and the team went to to get him to be able to do interviews on some mud islands - I think it was in Bangladesh. All you want is a flipping table that's the right height for you - honestly I think this is a hill worth dying on.

I do sometimes find myself wondering if the social model really only caters to people who need to use a chair but are otherwise unaffected. My disability means I have some symptoms which cannot be catered for.

Choconut The table is the thing that has brought it all to a head and given them a reason to say I'm now currently unfit for work, but the whole 'we have already made adjustments for you, so you shouldn't be 'blaming' disability for what are clearly impairment thus questionable capability issues' is a troubling theme.

So many useful, and interesting responses to original question of the social model and how it's being used, as well as the problems it's leaving me with personally, and how it relates to ESA/PIP procedures.

Apologies it's moved faster than I can type to answer all, (didn't expect a big response TBH!) but all are read and appreciated. I have to go out, but will be back in a few hours

storminamooncup you're hitting the nail on the head with The issue here is not the approach, it is how that approach is interpreted

Sorry, I'm aware I'm basically ignoring your original question about the social model, just dropping in some sources of support:

Disability Law Service have a helpline and can help with initial advice for employment issues (they can provide full support to tribunal if you're in the London area):

https://dls.org.uk/our-services/employment/

Disability Rights UK have a student helpline:

https://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/disabled-students-helpline

My very long comment was just eaten so forgive me if this one is a bit jumbled!

first: thank you so much for a very thought provoking thread.

second: I think there is a third, embedded, issue that goes beyond the medical vs social disability approach.

the embedded or occluded issue is , perhaps, the locus of responsibility for adjustments to the environment (wheelchair, ramp, table height) and the locus of responsibility for the quality of life afforded to the disabled person as a person vs as a worker.

on the first point what I mean is that the costs of the mechanical or social adjustments are borne, as they should be, by society/trusts/nhs/employers but each of these does so unwillingly with an eye to cost cutting. Why must OP wait until functioning is further degraded before getting an electric wheelchair? Why must OP —and others—be housebound until a personal carer can take them out? Wouldn’t it be more efficient to have a licensed disabled/elderly taxi system in place that would bring OP to the bus or to work?
the administrative cost of metering and means testing to ration care is almost always more than the money saved by preventing the “undeserving” from accessing the benefiit.

to my second point: there is a problematic focus on the OP as worker. The “job” of her supports is done if she can earn money/please employer regardless of the danger to her health and functioning. The description of the OP melting from the heat and endangering her health/completely needlessly in an office environment, should remind us that the worker’s right to a safe workspace is always at risk. In reality no workspace would be safe for longterm work if workers didn’t fight for it. That is as true for ergonomic protections (which are good for every worker) as it is for protections against toxic exposures or contagion or spoiled food in the cafeteria.
so at that point disability rights are just a subset of worker’s rights to a safe productive environment that does not further degrade the worker’s health or quality of life.

Thank you so much for this. I have been having raging battles this week about my son's needs still being needs even if they are partially met. Their argument being that if the need is met it is no longer a need.

@smooththecat Absolutely agree.

Good luck with everything OP - and thank you for this thread.

Happy to signpost to any organisations, including mine, who can train employers on disability and the social model if anyone feels their organisation needs it.

This is really shit and difficult OP, I'm so sorry. It's very hard.

What do they mean by impairment compared to disability?

My son has a disability. His disability causes impairments. It's those impairments he needs reasonable adjustments for. You'll never remove his disability because you don't suddenly stop having MS, or CP or MND or any of the 100's of other disabilities there are.

The idea of the social model is that just because you have a diagnosis it doesn't mean it's a disability. MS is disabling but with the right aids, adaptations and attitudes an individual can live a long healthy happy and fulfilling life with the disease.

It's the same principles that PIP works under. They ask for how it affects you because a disease means nothing without knowing what impact it has on your life. One of my health conditions some call a disability but I don't because I accommodate for it in my daily life so for me it doesn't disable me to that extent. If I wanted to climb Everest sure it would be a disability and no level of accomodations would enable me to fulfil that ambition.

It's about rethinking attitudes to illness. The medical model makes you a victim because of your body or brain not working well. The social model empowers you and blames society for not supporting you.

Well firstly, people identify in different ways. Some people prefer disabled over impairment, some prefer impairment over disabled. Some people prefer autistic or dyslexic, over either disabled or impairment. Some people don't even realise they meet the definition of disabled under the Equality Act.
The social model says we are disabled by society. We don't 'have' a disability, disability is something that is done to us. We are prevented from being able - society is DIS abling us. If that make sense. We still have our impairments though, and that's kind of why we say impairments.
But as I said above, we all have different ways of identifying and that's cool. You do you. There is no right or wrong. Some people don't like the social model at all and prefer the medical model. Again, you do you.

PS and its better to say 'adjustments' rather than 'reasonable adjustments' because the word reasonable tells the employer or educational institution: "just do the absolute minimum required by law". People should seek to go beyond what is reasonable and not just focus on the legality.

They’ve misunderstood both the social model and adjustments. Sounds like whoever is in charge of this at your workplace just isn’t competent.

If you don't like the 'social model', which model do you propose?
Do you feel it's realistic to even the playing field? By that I mean do you accept that if you have a disability realistically life's gonna be harder, just the same as if you're a single parent, or have limited career choices.

I dislike the 'ah its the same for single parents' argument.

The duty to make adjustments under the Equality Act only applies to disabled people, NOT other protected characteristics.

I speak from experience where I was denied an adjustment as that particular adjustment (continued working from home after covid) wouldn't be 'fair' to parents. I went to tribunal - won my case - because flexible working as an adjustment is not the same as flexible working for everyone else.

Yeah we all have disadvantages, but the disadvantages are not the same for every protected characteristics. Its called 'the social model of disability', not simply 'the social model'.

We should however, seek to create a fair and inclusive society for all.

It doesn't sound like they're using the social model of disability, it sounds like they're making minimal effort and talking absolute bollocks!

An adjustment/accomodation/etc is not one if it doesn't actually help - my power wheelchair won't help my sight-impaired but perfectly mobile friend, and her guide dog, as lovely as he is, will not help me get around instead of my wheelchair!

This doesn't seem like incompetence, unless its wilfull, malicious incompetence designed to make you quit - it seems like they just don't give a shit (I guess it could be both!)

I’ve been on the middle management side of this, caught between helping a colleague I manage and HR/ senior management. For example hearing aids= can attend all meetings or voice to text software=dyslexic staff member magically becomes a great organiser, or a ramp means a staff member in a wheelchair can suddenly teach across multiple rooms and can navigate packed corridors on lesson change overs.
Its often a shit defence, rather than a workable strategy

Sounds like the workplace is a good candidate for a discrimination claim.

'Reasonable adjustments' is a legal term and it's important that people know what their rights are.

I don't know whether just saying 'adjustments' is a good strategy or not when discussing with employers or colleges but lots of people appear to be having to fight hard, just to get the absolute minimum required by law, so I doubt it.

Either way, disabled employees and students are in a much stronger position in any discussion if they understand what the law says because they know their employer's or college's bottom line - i.e. the least they can be expected to accept.

Employers and colleges are required to provide reasonable adjustments, not just any old adjustments, and reasonable has a legal definition.

What model do you want? Partly why I started this thread was given how the social model of disability seemed to be being used I wondered both if it was being abused and also If we needed a new one.

Is it realistic to level the playing field? Yes, if you want disabled people in work and to be financially self-supporting.

Of course I accept life’s always going to be harder, along with shorter, and more painful. I don't think disabled people have ever had an option not to accept it.