This article may contain inappropriate or misinterpreted citations that do not verify the text. Please help improve this article by checking for inaccuracies. (help, talk, get involved!) (October 2011)

Ableism (pronounced ey-buh-liz-uhm^[1]) is a form of discrimination or social prejudice against people with disabilities. It is known by many names, including disability discrimination, physicalism, handicapism, and disability oppression.^[2] It is also sometimes known as disablism, although there is some dispute as to whether ableism and disablism are synonymous, and some people within disability rights circles find the latter term's use inaccurate.^{[citation needed]} Discrimination faced by those who have or are perceived to have a mental disorder is sometimes called mentalism rather than ableism.^{[citation needed]}

Definition of the concept[link]

Similar to many of the assumptions underlying the medical model of disability amongst many clinicians, the "ableist" societal world-view is that the able-bodied are the norm in society, and that people who have disabilities must either strive to become that norm or should keep their distance from able-bodied people.^{[citation needed]} A disability is thus, inherently, a "bad" thing that must be overcome. The ableist worldview holds that disability is an error, a mistake, or a failing, rather than a simple consequence of human diversity, akin to race, ethnicity, sexual orientation or gender.^[3]

Fiona A Kumari Campbell, Senior Lecturer in disability studies at Griffith University, draws a distinction between disablism and ableism. Disablism, she notes, has been the traditional focus of study within the field of disability studies. Disablism promotes the unequal treatment of the (physically) disabled versus the able-bodied. It marks the disabled as the Other, and works from the perspective of the able-bodied.^[4]

Citing prior work (Clear 1999) (Iwasaki & Mactavish 2005) (Watts & Erevelles 2004), Campbell acknowledges that the concept of ableism is, as of 2009, not clearly defined in the literature and has "limited definitional or conceptual specifity".^[5] She herself distinguishes between ableism and disablism, defining the former as:

A network of beliefs, processes and practices that produces a particular kind of self and body (the corporeal standard) that is projected as the perfect, species-typical, and therefore essential and fully human. Disability is then cast as a diminished state of being human.^[5][6]

Other definitions of ableism include those of Vera Chouinard (professor of geography at McMaster University), who defines it as "ideas, practices, institutions, and social relations that presume able-bodiedness, and by so doing, construct persons with disabilities as marginalized […] and largely invisible 'others'"^[7][5] and Ron Amundson (professor of philosophy at the University of Hawaii at Hilo) and Gayle Taira, who define it as "a doctrine that falsely treats impairments as inherently and naturally horrible and blames the impairments themselves for the problems experienced by the people who have them".^[8][5]

Harpur (Research Fellow in Employment Relations at Griffith University) argues that the term ableism is a powerful label that has the capacity to ameliorate the use of negative stereotypes and facilitate cultural change by focusing attention on the discriminator rather than on the victim or impairment.^[9]

Laws in the United States defending people with disabilities[link]

In the US, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) enacted into law certain civil penalties for failing to make public places comply with access codes known as the ADA Access Guidelines (ADAAG); this law also helped expand the use of certain adaptive devices, such as TTYs (phone systems for the hearing/speech impaired), some computer-related hardware and software, and wheelchair ramps or lifts on public transportation and private automobiles.^{[citation needed]} In the UK, meanwhile, the 1995 Disability Discrimination Act and Disability Discrimination Act 2005 and the Equality Act 2010 attempt the same.

However, none of these laws requires all buildings constructed before the date of the Act to be modified to fit the physical directives of the Act. Instead, these directives are applied to three general categories of buildings: existing government administration buildings and structures regardless of age; all newly-constructed buildings and structures; and significantly renovated and/or refurbished buildings and structures.

Therefore, in general, because of overriding regulatory frameworks such as landmark statuses, historic building statuses, and similar, very few older structures in a given society may be modified according to the new requirements.^{[citation needed]}

Sometimes, under their own power and for their own reasons, a business or service that does not have to modify its building structure to fit the accessibility requirements will modify it anyway. But this does not always happen, and the building continues to be fundamentally inaccessible to people with physical disabilities.^{[examples needed]}

California Law[link]

In addition to the federal protections provided by the ADA, California's Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) provides additional protections to California employees. Notably, FEHA applies to employers with 5 or more employees and offers more extensive protection than the ADA.^[10]

See also[link]

	Disability portal
	Discrimination portal

• ADAPT
• Audism
• Autism rights movement
• Custom employment
• Disability etiquette
• Disability hate crime
• Disability rights
• Inclusion (disability rights)
• Intersectionality
• Kyriarchy
• List of disability rights activists
• Psychophobia
• Social criticism
• Phillip Davies

References[link]

Bibliography[link]

Further reading[link]

• Campbell, Fiona A. Kumari (2008). "Refusing Able(ness): A Preliminary Conversation about Ableism". M/C Journal 11 (3). http://journal.media-culture.org.au/index.php/mcjournal/article/viewArticle/46/0. 
• Clear, Mike (1999). "The "Normal" and the Monstrous in Disability Research". Disability & Society 14 (4): 435–448. 
• Hehir, Thomas (2005). "Eliminating Ableism in Education". In Katzman, Lauren I.. Special education for a new century. Harvard educational review. 41. Harvard Educational Review. ISBN 978-0-916690-44-1. 
• Iwasaki, Yoshitaka; Mactavish, Jennifer (2005). "Ubiquitous Yet Unique: Perspectives of People with Disabilities on Stress". Rehabilitation Counselling Bulletin 48 (4): 194–208. DOI:10.1177/00343552050480040101. 
• Watts, Ivan Eugene; Erevelles, Nirmala (2004). "These Deadly Times: Reconceptualizing School Violence by Using Critical Race Theory and Disability Studies". American Educational Research Journal 41 (2): 271–299. JSTOR 3699367. 

External links[link]

• Alliance for Technology Access
• Center for Disability Law and Policy
• Ragged Edge Online
• "The Social Movement Left Out" - Z Magazine article by Marta Russell
• Nonprofit Research Collection on Disability & Employment Published on IssueLab
• Beating Disablism
• Disablism
• Disability Studies Italy
• Disability Discrimination Information and News