‘Doing’ normativity in disability studies: soft suggestions towards an empirical ethics of disability

15Citations
Citations of this article
36Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

As a field concerned with improving the lives of disabled people, disability studies has always been a normative field of inquiry. For this reason, Vehmas and Watson (2016) urge disability scholars to engage with normativity more explicitly. This article builds on Vehmas and Watson to consider how disability scholars can ‘do’ normativity so as to arrive at normative insights attuned to the lives of disabled people themselves. The article has two aims. The first is to examine how normativity has been ‘done’ in disability studies research up to the present. Here, the article locates three problems that hinder the pursuit of normative insights that have sufficient bearing on disability experiences. The second is to make some suggestions for more reflexively ‘doing’ normativity in disability studies in a way that does yield insights of this kind. For this latter goal, the article draws on ideas from the field of empirical ethics.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

van der Weele, S. (2024). ‘Doing’ normativity in disability studies: soft suggestions towards an empirical ethics of disability. Disability and Society, 39(3), 525–547. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2022.2087492

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free