wolbring

Ability Expectation/Ableism glossary


Just a starting point I first have stuff on ableism  with some references and then four tables. Table 1 covers area of disability; table to the body image; table 3 language around person table 4   health references are at the end

Ability Studies

Ability studies investigates how ability expectation (want stage) and ableism (need stage) hierarchies and preferences come to pass and the impact of such hierarchies and preferences. [1]. Within it, it allows to investigate eco-ability expectations and eco-ableism that focuses on ecological dynamics of human-human; human-animal and human-environment relationships [2,5].

Ability Studies allows for the study of multiple subject formations, social relationships, and lived experiences based on diverse ability expectations and the actions linked to such expectations. It encourages the study of how legal, ethical/moral, biological, cultural and social constructs are exhibiting ability expectations and how such ability expectations and the actions they trigger leads to an ability based and ability justified understanding of oneself, one’s body and one’s relationship with others of one’s species, other species and one’s environment [1,4]]. Ability studies can be used in inter-, trans- and intra- disciplinarily ways to generate policies and advance the relationship between humans, animals and their environment [1,2,5].

Ability expectation: One likes as an individual or as a social structure to have a certain ability),

Ableism: One perceives as an individual or as a social structure certain ability as essential

Disablism: A given ability expectation or ableism is used by an individual or a social structure to disabled the one without that ability

Enablism: A given ability expectation or ableism is used by an individual or a social structure to enable

Active disablism: One actively tries to generate social conditions that disable the one without the ability or where one generates new ability expectations with the expressed purpose to generate a hierarchy between social groups with one being the dominant one. So the primary purpose is to disable one based on the difference in abilities (perceived or real)

Omission or passive disablism: One disables someone else by not accommodating the other individual or social group that does not exhibit the ability due to simply not being aware, not thinking about it (see further down section on ability privilege). The primary purpose was not to generate the disablement due to ability differences (perceived or real) but it’s a side effect of one not wanting or one being unable to accommodate the other (see ability privilege further down).

Passive disablism can become active disablism and vice versa

Where did it start:

The concept of ableism was developed by the disabled people’s rights movement (Various, 2006) to question species-typical, normative body ability expectations and the ability privileges (i.e. ability to work, to gain education, to be part of society, to have an identity, to be seen as citizen) that come with a species-typical body (although they did not use the term ability privilege). Disablism conceptualized within this meaning of ability privilege suggests that people with expected, normative body abilities are not willing to give up their ability privileges” [5]

Or in other words

Ableism: A set of beliefs, processes and practices that produce based on ones abilities a particular kind of understanding of oneself, one‟s body and one‟s relationship with others of one‟s species, other species and one‟s environment and includes one being judged by others.

Or in other words

Ableism privileges „species-typical abilities‟ while labelling „sub species-typical abilities‟ as deficient, as impaired and undesirable often with the accompanying disablism the discriminatory oppressive, or abusive behaviour against the sub species-typical people [5]

Moving beyond disabled people

Ableism exhibits in general a favouritism for certain abilities that are projected as essential while at the same time labelling real or perceived deviation from or lack of these essential abilities as problematic leading or contributing to the justification of a variety of other isms such as sexism, racism, castism, Age-ism and so forth [1, 4].

Here the claim is not about species-typical versus sub species-typical, but that one has – as a species or a social group- superior abilities compared to other species or other segments in ones species.

Moving beyond the body

Ableism exhibits in general a favouritism for certain abilities that are projected as essential for certai humans to exhibit while at the same time labelling real or perceived deviation from or lack of these essential abilities as problematic leading or contributing to the justification of a variety of other isms such as GDP-ism, consumer-ism, productivity-ism, competitiveness-ism  and so forth [1, 4, 5] and here.

Moving to the inclusion of human-animal and human-nature relationships

Eco-ableism is a conceptual framework for analysing enabling and disabling human ability desires, a class of desires that shape the relationship between humans, between humans and animals and humans and their environment [2, 5, 6]

Moving beyond the species-sub-species typical

Human related: A set of beliefs, processes and practices that perceive the improvement of human body abilities beyond homo sapiens typical boundaries (species-typical and sub species-typical) as essential. This enhancement version of ableism, sees all human bodies as limited, defective and in need of constant improvement of their abilities beyond homo sapiens -typical boundaries. The  body ability enhancement can be of three types a) external by shaping the environment, b) internal reversal by modifying bodily structures in an reversible fashion and c) internal non-reversal by modifying bodily structures in a non-reversible fashion.

Animal related: A set of beliefs, processes and practices which champions the especially cognitive enhancement of animal species beyond species typical boundaries leading to cognitive or otherwise “enabled species‟.

Environment related: A set of beliefs, processes and practices which champions the a) enhancement of especially the Homo sapiens beyond species typical boundaries to cope with the environmental challenges to come b) shaping the environment (geo-engineering, gated biospheres…)

Moving beyond the negative aspect of Ability Expectation and Ableism

Exhibition of ability expectations or ableism’s can also have positive consequences(enablement/enablism)[7] and here; ones desire to have the ability to live in an equitable society, some see the concept of sustainable development as positive step in what humans expect ability wise from nature…

All of the above fits with these three terms

Ability expectation: One likes as an individual or as a social structure to have a certain ability),

Ableism: One perceives as an individual or as a social structure certain ability as essential

Disablism: A given ability expectation or ableism is used by an individual or a social structure to disabled the one without that ability

Active disablism: One actively tries to generate social conditions that disable the one without the ability or where one generates new ability expectations with the expressed purpose to generate a hierarchy between social groups with one being the dominant one. So the primary purpose is to disable one based on the difference in abilities (perceived or real)

Omission or passive disablism: One disables someone else by not accommodating the other individual or social group that does not exhibit the ability due to simply not being aware, not thinking about it (see further down section on ability privilege). The primary purpose was not to generate the disablement due to ability differences (perceived or real) but it’s a side effect of one not wanting or one being unable to accommodate the other (see ability privilege further down).

Passive disablism can become active disablism and vice versa

Some Ability Studies concepts

 Ethics of Ableism/Ableism Ethics is a framework of standards and values that (a) guide beliefs, processes and practices that produces based on ones abilities a particular kind of understanding of oneself, one’s body and one’s relationship with others of one’s species, other species and one’s environment and includes one being judged by others; (b) guide the favouritism for certain abilities and how one decide which abilities to favour over others; (c) guide the reactions towards humans and other biological entities that are seen -real or perceived- to lack these essential abilities. whatever set of abilities one has, and that one will not be forced to have a prescribed set of abilities to live a secure life. [1, 2, 8]

Ability Security        

that one is accepted, and is able to live one’s life with whatever set of abilities one has, and that one will not be forced to have a prescribed set of abilities to live a secure life [2].

Governance of ability expectations / Ability expectation Governance

is about how we govern ability expectations and ableism, the favouritism for certain abilities and the reaction towards non favoured abilities (for example [9-10].

“Ability expectation literacy” means people understand the consequences of ability expectations. “Ability expectation governance” focuses on how to navigate the societal aspects of ability expectations. see here

“Ability discrimination,” meaning that one is oppressed because their ability is different see here.

Ability expectation oppression: Being oppressed by ability expectations of others [11] see linkage to colonial theory [11] see also here and here

Ability-expectation creep,” meaning that we seem to constantly expect more abilities see also here

Ability Privilege

Ability privilege describes the advantages enjoyed by those who exhibit certain abilities and the unwillingness of these individuals to relinquish the advantage linked to the abilities especially with the reason that these are earned or birth given (natural) abilities. To link it back to disabled people as the originator of the term ableism. The concept of ableism was developed to question the ability privileges (i.e. ability to work, to gain education, to be part of society, to have an identity, to be seen as citizen) that come with a species-typical body (although they did not use the term ability privilege)[5] and here. Disablism conceptualized within this meaning of ability privilege suggests that people with expected, normative body abilities are not willing to give up their ability privileges [5] and here. The cultural phenomenon of Ability privileges, however, can be employed beyond the social group of disabled people and their encounter with the ‘ability normative’ body.

Ability privileges can play themselves out between traditionally defined social groups (e.g. race, gender, class). However at the same time social groups are also formed based on ability privileges whereby the social group is defined by whether its members have or don’t have a given ability (the ability-have and the ability-non-have social groups). Ability privilege  also influences how one relates to nature and to animals and shapes one identity [5]  and here

Ability Inequity and inequality from [3]

 For both, ability inequity and ability inequality two subgroups exist. One group is linked to intrinsic bodily abilities and the other group is linked to external abilities, abilities generated by human interventions that impact humans. These two subgroups of internal and external ability inequities and inequality are quite distinct in their effects and discourse dynamics, involved stakeholders and goals.

Definition: Ability inequality is a descriptive term denoting any uneven distribution of access to and protection from abilities generated through human interventions, right or wrong

Example: Lack of access to education employment….  Ability inequalities also are experienced by so called body normative people. Eating certain food leads to better abilities, but not everyone has access to this food. Clean water leads to better abilities, but not everyone has access to it.

Definition: Ability inequality is a descriptive term denoting any uneven judgment of abilities intrinsic to biological structures such as the human body, right or wrong

Example: Negative judgments of people who ‘lack’ certain ‘normative’ intrinsic set of body related abilities as defective (e.g. not hearing as impairment person versus ability diverse person), at the same time people do not define themselves as defective because they cannot fly; or less payment for the same amount of work for women versus men….

 

Definition: Ability inequity is a normative term denoting an unjust or unfair distribution of access to and protection from abilities generated through human interventions

Example: One could say that one of the purposes of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities  was to highlight which ability inequities are unjust and to prescribe some remedies for them

Definition: Ability inequity is a normative term denoting an unjust or unfair judgment of abilities intrinsic to biological structures such as the human body

.Negative judgment linked to the abilities or perceived lack thereof of disabled people or women are judged unfairly with their abilities in work payments.

 

[1] Wolbring, G., Why NBIC?  Why Human Performance Enhancement? Innovation; The European Journal of Social Science Research 2008, 21 (1), 25-40

[2] Wolbring, G., Ecohealth through an ability studies and disability studies lens In Ecological Health: Society, Ecology and Health, Gislason, M. K., Ed. Emerald: London, UK, 2013; Vol. 15, pp 91-107

[3] Wolbring, G., Ableism and Favoritism for Abilities Governance, Ethics and Studies: New Tools for Nanoscale and Nanoscale enabled Science and Technology Governance. In The Yearbook of Nanotechnology in Society, vol. II: The Challenges of Equity and Equality, Cozzens, S.; M.Wetmore, J., Eds. Springer: New York, 2010; pp 89-104.

[4]  Wolbring, G., The Politics of Ableism. Development 2008, 51 (2), 252-258.

 

[5] Wolbring, G., Ability Privilege: A Needed Addition to Privilege Studies. Journal for Critical Animal Studies 2014, 13 (2). P.118-141  http://www.crds.org/research/faculty/icasjustmine.pdf

[6] Wolbring, G., Eco-ableism. Anthropology News 2012, Sept. 14.

 

[7] Wolbring, G., & Yumakulov, S. (2015). Education through an Ability Studies Lens.

Zeitschrift für Inklusion, 10(2), no page number. Retrieved from: http://www.inklusion

online.net/index.php/inklusion-online/article/view/278/261

 

[8] Wolbring, G., Ethical Theories and Discourses through an Ability Expectations and Ableism

Lens: The Case of Enhancement and Global Regulation. Asian Bioethics Review 2012, 4 (4),

293-309

 

[9] Wolbring, G., & Diep, L. (2016). Cognitive/Neuroenhancement through an Ability Studies lens. In F. Jotterand & V. Dubljevic (Eds.), Cognitive Enhancement (pp. 57-75). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press

[10] Wolbring, G (2015) Human Enhancement verlangt die Auseinandersetzung mit Fähigkeitserwartungen in special issue “Schwerpunkt// Der optimierte Mensch in «Soziale Sicherheit CHSS» Social Security, Journal of the Federal Social Insurance Office, Switzerland Vol 16, Issue 1, p 16-19  http://www.bsv.admin.ch/dokumentation/publikationen/00096/03361/03362/index.html?lang=de The French version of full journal issue is  http://www.bsv.admin.ch/dokumentation/publikationen/00096/03361/03362/index.html?lang=fr  The English version Human Enhancement: The need for Ability Expectation Governance available upon request

[11] Wolbring, G., & Ghai, A. (2015). Interrogating the impact of scientific and technological development on disabled children in India and beyond. Disability and the Global South, 2(2), 667-685.

 

Table 1 covers area of disability; table to the body image; table 3 language around person table 4   health references are at the end

 

Table 1

Glossary for the 21st Century a starting point by Dr. Gregor Wolbring
Term Definition
Disability
If one hears the term disability or disabled person or people with a

disability… often two different aspects (body image and social reality) are covered by the term disability

 

a) the terms are used to label the body and its functioning as deficient as impaired as non normative as sub normative based on species-typical expectations and

b) the terms are used to describe the social, environmental parameter a person with a certain body functioning faces.

 

I do believe it is better to use different terms for the two areas of body image and social reality. This is reflected in the definitions below.

Also to the discussion of “people first language” whether one should use ‘disabled person’ or ‘person with a disability’ within the context of this glossary the order is irrelevant as both orders have the same interpretation of the term disability they use. So I do not adhere here to one or the other order.

 

Furthermore one can also reshape the two discourses within ability studies language

 

Body image wording in ability studies language

Impairment is a medical model of body understanding. A social model of body language could be ability diverse body

Social reality in Ability Studies language

Disability  so the social discrimination  can also be rephrased in ability studies language namely disabled people are ability expectation oppressed people. And people with disabilities are people that are oppressed by ability expectations and experiencing ability expectation oppression is a form of disability.

 

                           Models of disability

If we ignore for the time being the problem that the term disability is used to describe body image and social reality, there is a debate as to what causes the disablement. The oldest and most used model the medical model situate the culprit of the disablement within the body whereas the newer model put forward by disability right movement in the 1960’s onwards perceives the lack of social accommodation to the ability difference of the person as the cause of the disablement. But to be clear the models are about where the disablement is originating from. The models do not say anything about the body image (deviation or variation, see below for body image options).  I myself therefore prefer to have the term disability to be used just to highlight the disablement and use other terms to highlight the body image. Instead of using the term disability to label the body image.

Medical model of

Disability

People disabled by their body-structure related sub species-typical functioning
Social model of disability People disabled by the attitudinal and

environmental barriers they experience due to their body-structure related sub species-typical functioning that hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with

others

Transhumanized medical model of disability People disabled by their body structure related -‘as impaired labelled’- sub species-typical and species-typical functioning (everyone not performing beyond species-typical functioning).
Transhumanized social model of disability People disabled by the attitudinal and

environmental barriers they experience due to their body-structure related sub species-typical and species-typical functioning that hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others

 

Table 2

The body image

This section is about the different ways the body can be perceived. In tune with my believe that disability should NOT be used to describe the body I use here impairment to signify a medical model of the body understanding and terms such as ‘variability’ and ‘ability diverse’ to signify a social model of the body understanding of the body.

 

Impairment/medical deficiency model of the body/body image A body that is labelled to function sub species- typical
Transhumanized version A body that is labelled to function sub species-
of Impairment/medical deficiency model of the body/body image typical and species-typical
Vari-ability/ability diverse/ non medical/non deficiency model of the body/body image A vari-ability in bodily functioning that differs from the species-typical norm but does not exceed the species-typical norm and is seen as a variation and not a deviation
Transhumanized understanding of Variability/ non medical/non deficiency model of the body/body image A vari-ability in bodily functioning that exceed the species-typical norm and is seen as a variation and not a deviation

 

 

Table 3

The person (the definitions here take into account that there are two discourses around the person namely the labelling of the body and the treatment of the person) as outlined above and that the term disabled/disability… should only be used to classify the social reality and that if one wants to describe the body that there are terms such as impairment/variability, ability diverse. If one want to highlight the body image and the social reality at the same time one has to use a combination.     

 

Disabled person/ability expectation oppressed people Everyone who encounters body structure/function related attitudinal and environmental barriers that hinders ones full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others,
Person with a Disability/people who are oppressed by ability expectations Everyone who encounters body structure/function related attitudinal and environmental barriers that hinders one‟s full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others,
Impaired person/Person with an Impairment Everyone who identifies oneself as having a sub-normative functioning, deficient body based on a species-typical norm.
Vari-abled, ability diverse person/ Person with a vari-abled, ability diverse Body Everyone who identifies oneself as having a vari- ability in bodily functioning that differs from the species-typical norm but does not exceed the species typical norm.
Vari-abled/ability diverse and disabled person (ability expectation oppressed person) Everyone who identifies oneself as having a vari- ability in bodily functioning that differs from the species typical norm and who encounters                                    body structure/function related, ableism related attitudinal and environmental barriers that hinder one‟s full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others.
Impaired and disabled person (ability expectation oppressed person) Everyone who identifies oneself as having sub-normative, deficient bodily functioning based on a species-typical norm and who encounters body

 

  structure/function related, ableism related attitudinal and environmental barriers that hinder one‟s full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others.
Transhumanized impaired person (techno poor impaired person) Everyone who identifies oneself as being deficient because one is not able to improve oneself beyond Homo sapiens normative functioning whether through a) external means by shaping the environment, or b) internal means by modifying ones bodily structures.
Transhumanized disabled person/ person (ability expectation oppressed person)  (techno poor disabled person/ (ability expectation oppressed person) Everyone who is not enhanced beyond Homo sapiens normative functioning whether through a) external means by shaping the environment, or b) internal means by modifying ones bodily structures and who encounters body structure/function related attitudinal and environmental barriers mostly justified by a transhumanized version of ableism that hinder one‟s full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others.
Transhumanized impaired and disabled person (techno poor impaired and disabled person/ (ability expectation oppressed person) Everyone who identifies oneself as being deficient because one is not able to improve oneself beyond Homo sapiens normative functioning whether through a) external means by shaping the environment, or b) internal means by modifying ones bodily structures and who encounters attitudinal and environmental barriers mostly justified by a transhumanized version of ableism that hinder one‟s full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others,
Transhumanized vari- abled/ability diverse person Everyone who identifies oneself as having a beyond species-typical functioning variability in bodily functioning that differs from the species-typical norm. This could be achieved by a) external means by shaping the environment, or b) internal means

by modifying ones bodily structures

Transhumanized vari- abled (ability diverse) and disabled person (ability expectation oppressed person) Everyone who identifies oneself as having a beyond species-typical functioning variability in bodily functioning that differs from the species- typical norm and was achieved through a) external means by shaping the environment, or b) internal means by modifying ones bodily structures and who therefore encounters attitudinal and environmental barriers mostly justified by an Anti- transhumanized version of ableism that hinder one’s full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others

 

Examples of different combination of body image/image of the person and social treatment (disablement, disability)

As stated above one can have different combinations of body image and social reality a) medical/medical; b) medical/social; c) social/social and d) social/medical. Below the term disability is use to cover social reality

Medical/Medical

 

medical model of the person/medical model of

disability

The impairment (sub-species typical functioning) is the cause of the disablement, the lack of full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with non-impaired, species-typical people
Medical/Social

 

medical model of the person/ Social model of

disability

disability results from the interaction between persons with impairments (sub-species typical functioning) and attitudinal and environmental barriers that hinders their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others.  This is the combination used in the WHO model of “disability”, the UN convention on the rights of persons with “disabilities” and the American with “Disability” Act
Social/ Social

 

social model of the person/ Social model of disability,

Disability is the attitudinal and environmental barriers an ability diverse/variable person faces due to their ability diverse/variabled body related functioning that hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others,
Transhuman medical/social

transhumanist model of the person/Social model of disability,

disability results from the interaction between persons with impairments (species-typical and sub species-typical functioning) and attitudinal and environmental barriers that hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others,

Table 4

Models (identity) and determinants (interventions) of Health
If one deals with models and determinants of health one in the end deals with two issues. The models of health define the client (animal human, nature) and the cause whereby the determinants define the intervention
Medical model of health (31;46)     

Within the medical model of health, health is characterized as the normative functioning of biological systems (e.g. in humans or animals, nature) whereas disease/ illness is defined as the sub- normative functioning of biological systems. The “patient is the target of improvement through intervention (cure or prevention) .

Medical determinants of medical health   

 

place the cause of sub-normative functioning within the individual patient’s biological system leading to medical interventions towards the species typical

norm on the level of the individual focusing on medical cure, medical individualistic care and individualistic normative rehabilitation as the primary endpoint and at the political level the principal response is to make curative medicine more efficient (31;46)

Social determinants/ interventions of medical health

 

identify external factors as the cause for the “ill medical health” the sub-normative functioning of the individual, the patient and tries to fix the external factors to prevent medical ill health. This includes, for example, the elimination of contaminated water that leads to bacterial or parasitic infections, or job insecurity that contributes to stress and heart disease. (31;46). Although some social determinants interventions such as decreasing job insecurity also increase social well being, the performance indicator is a positive change in a medical parameter.

Social Health

 

Social well-being of a person not labeled as being in ill medical health or in danger of being medical ill (31;46);

 

Social determinants of social health

 

Interventions on the societal level that improve the social well-being

Transhumanized health

Transhumanized medical determinant intervention  

 

all Homo sapiens bodies – no matter how conventionally “medically healthy” – are defined as limited and defective as in ill health in need of constant improvement made possible by new technologies appearing on the horizon (a little bit like the constant software upgrades we do on our computers). Health in this model is the concept of having obtained maximum (at any given time) enhancement (improvement) of one’s abilities, functioning and body structure. (31;46)

 

These interventions see enhancement beyond species-typical body structures and functioning as a therapeutic intervention (transhumanization of medicalization) (31;46). Enhancement medicine is the new field providing the remedy and maintenance through surgery, pharmaceuticals, implants and other intervention on the level of the body. (31;46)

Existing understanding of Rehabilitation

 

Rehabilitation is a treatment or treatments designed to facilitate the process of recovery from injury, illness, or disease to as normal a condition as possible.

 

The purpose of rehabilitation is to restore some or all of the patient’s physical, sensory, and mental capabilities that were lost due to injury, illness, or disease. Rehabilitation includes assisting the patient to compensate for deficits that cannot be reversed medically.

 

The aim of rehabilitation, “to restore an individual to his/her former functional and environmental status, or alternatively, to maintain or maximize remaining function” (Williams, 1984, p. xiii),

 

http://medical- dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Rehabilitation

 

 

 

Transhumanized understanding of Rehabilitation

Rehabilitation is a treatment or treatments designed to facilitate the process of recovery from injury, illness, or disease to as optimum a condition as possible.

Rehabilitation is a treatment or treatments designed to facilitate the process of gaining a as optimum a condition as possible.

The purpose of rehabilitation is to restore some or all of the patient’s physical, sensory, and mental capabilities that were lost due to injury, illness, or disease. Rehabilitation includes assisting the patient to compensate for deficits that cannot be reversed medically.

 

The aim of rehabilitation, “to restore an individual

to his/her I former functional and environmental status, or alternatively, to maintain or maximize remaining function” (Williams, 1984, p. xiii),

 

Modified from http://medical- dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Rehabilitation

 

 

Reference List

 

  1. Panesar, S.; Wolbring, G., Analysis of North American Newspaper Coverage of Bionics Using the Disability Studies Framework. Technologies 2014, 2 (1), 1-30.
  2. Billawala, A.; Gregor, W., Analyzing the discourse surrounding Autism in the New York Times using an ableism lens. Disability Studies Quarterly 2014, 34 (1), no page numbers
  3. Wolbring, G., Hearing Beyond the Normal Enabled by Therapeutic Devices: The Role of the Recipient and the Hearing Profession. Neuroethics 2013, 6 (3), 607-616.
  4. Tynedal, J.; Wolbring, G., Paralympics and Its Athletes Through the Lens of the New York Times. Sports 2013, 1 (1), 13-36.
  5. Diep, L.; Wolbring, G., Who Needs to Fit in? Who Gets to Stand out? Communication Technologies Including Brain-Machine Interfaces Revealed from the Perspectives of Special Education School Teachers Through an Ableism Lens. Education Sciences 2013, 3 (1), 30-49.
  6. Wolbring, G.; Leopatra, V., Sensors: Views of Staff of a Disability Service Organization. Journal of Personalized Medicine 2013, 3 (1), 23-39.
  7. Wolbring, G.; Burke, B., Reflecting on Education for Sustainable Development through Two Lenses: Ability Studies and Disability Studies. Sustainability 2013, 5 (6), 2327-2342.
  8. Wolbring, G.; Diep, L.; Yumakulov, S.; Ball, N.; Yergens, D., Social Robots, Brain Machine Interfaces and Neuro/Cognitive Enhancers: Three Emerging Science and Technology Products through the Lens of Technology Acceptance Theories, Models and Frameworks. Technologies 2013, 1 (1), 3-25.
  9. Wolbring, G., Ecohealth through an ability studies and disability studies lens In Ecological Health: Society, Ecology and Health, Gislason, M. K., Ed. Emerald: London, UK, 2013; Vol. 15, pp 91-107.
  10. Wolbring, G.; Diep, L.; Yumakulov, S.; Ball, N.; Leopatra, V.; Yergens, D., Emerging Therapeutic Enhancement Enabling Health Technologies and Their Discourses: What Is Discussed within the Health Domain? Healthcare 2013, 1 (1), 20-52.
  11. Noga, J.; Wolbring, G., An Analysis of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio +20) Discourse Using an Ability Expectation Lens. Sustainability 2013, 5 (9), 3615-3639.
  12. Wolbring, G.; Mackay, R.; Rybchinski, T.; Noga, J., Disabled People and the Post-2015 Development Goal Agenda through a Disability Studies Lens Sustainability 2013, 5 (10), 4152-4182.
  13. Wolbring, G., ‘Culture of Peace’ from an Ability and Disability Studies Lens. In Expanding Peace Ecology: Peace, Security, Sustainability, Equity and Gender; Perspectives of IPRA’s Ecology and Peace Commission, Oswald Spring, U.; Brauch, H.-G.; Tidball, K., Eds. Springer: New York, 2013; Vol. 12, p 193.
  14. Wolbring, G.; Rybchinski, T., Social Sustainability and Its Indicators through a Disability Studies and an Ability Studies Lens. Sustainability 2013, 5 (11), 4889-4907.
  15. Hutcheon, E.; Wolbring, G., Deconstructing the Resilience Concept Using an Ableism Lens: Implications for People with Diverse Abilities. Dilemata 2013, (11), 235-252.
  16. Ball, N.; Wolbring, G., Portrayals of and Arguments around different Eugenic Practices: Past and Present. International Journal of Disability, Community & Rehabilitation 2013, 12 (2), Article 2.
  17. Hutcheon, E.; Wolbring, G., “Cripping” Resilience: Contributions from Disability Studies to Resilience Theory. M/C Journal 2013, 16 (5).
  18. Wolbring, G., Therapeutic bodily assistive devices and paralympic athlete expectations in winter sport. Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine 2012, 22 (1), 51-57.
  19. Wolbring, G., Therapeutic Enhancements and the view of Rehabilitation Educators. Dilemata International Journal of Applied Ethics 2012, (8), 169-183.
  20. Wolbring, G., Paralympians outperforming Olympians: An increasing challenge for Olymp-ism and the Paralympic and Olympic movement. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 2012.
  21. Hutcheon, E. J.; Wolbring, G., Voices of disabled post secondary students: Examining higher education “disability” policy using an ableism lens. 2012.
  22. Wolbring, G., Expanding Ableism: Taking down the Ghettoization of Impact of Disability Studies Scholars. Societies 2012, 2 (3), 75-83.
  23. Wolbring, G.; Ball, N., Nanoscale Science and Technology and People with Disabilities in Asia: An Ability Expectation Analysis. NanoEthics 2012, 6 (2), 127-135.
  24. Wolbring, G., Eco-ableism. Anthropology News 2012, Sept. 14.
  25. Wolbring, G., Citizenship Education through an Ability Expectation and “Ableism” Lens: The Challenge of Science and Technology and Disabled People. Education Sciences 2012, 2 (3), 150-164.
  26. Wolbring, G., Nanotechnology for Democracy versus Democratization of Nanotechnology. In Little by Little: Expansions of Nanoscience and Emerging Technologies, Lente, H. v.; Coenen, C.; Fleischer, T.; Konrad, K.; Krabbenborg, L.; Milburn, C.; Thoreau, F., Eds. AKA-Verlag/IOS Press: Dordrecht, 2012.
  27. Yumakulov, S.; Yergens, D.; Wolbring, G., Imagery of people with disabilities within social robotics research. Proc.ICSR, LNAI 2012, 7621, 168-177.
  28. Wolbring, G., Ethical Theories and Discourses through an Ability Expectations and Ableism Lens: The Case of Enhancement and Global Regulation. Asian Bioethics Review 2012, 4 (4), 293-309.
  29. Wolbring, G., Ableism and energy security and insecurity:. Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 2011, 5 (1), Article 3.
  30. Wolbring, G., People with disabilities and social determinants of health discourses. Canadian Journal of Public Health. 2011, 102 (4), 317.
  31. Wolbring, G., Nanotechnology and the Transhumanization of Health, Medicine, and Rehabilitation. Lee Kleinmann, D.; Delborne, J.; Cloud-Hansen, K.; Handelsman, J., Eds. Mary Ann Liebert: New Rochelle, NY, 2010; pp 290-303.
  32. Wolbring, G., Ableism and Favoritism for Abilities Governance, Ethics and Studies: New Tools for Nanoscale and Nanoscale enabled Science and Technology Governance. In The Yearbook of Nanotechnology in Society, vol. II: The Challenges of Equity and Equality, Cozzens, S.; M.Wetmore, J., Eds. Springer: New York, 2010; pp 89-104.
  33. Wolbring, G., Obsolescence and body technologies Obsolescencia y tecnologías del cuerpo. Dilemata International Journal of Applied Ethics 2010, 2 (4), 67-83.
  34. Burke, B.; Wolbring, G., Beyond Education for All: Using ableism studies lens and the BIAS FREE framework. Development (Rome) 2010, 53 (4), 535-539.
  35. Coenen, C.; Schuijff, M.; Smits, M.; Klaassen, P.; Hennen, L.; Rader, M.; Wolbring, G. Human Enhancement Study; (IP/A/STOA/FWC/2005-28/SC35, 41 & 45) PE 417.483; 2009, 2009.http://www.europarl.europa.eu/stoa/publications/studies/stoa2007-13_en.pdf
  36. Wolbring, G., Bionics, ‘therapeutic’ enhancement, the UN Convention on the rights off persons with disabilities and the way ahead. Journal of International Biotechnology Law 2009, 6 (5), 193-206.
  37. Wolbring, G., A Culture of Neglect: Climate Discourse and Disabled People. Journal Media and Culture 2009, 12 (4).
  38. Wolbring, G., Why NBIC? Why Human Performance Enhancement? Innovation; The European Journal of Social Science Research 2008, 21 (1), 25-40.
  39. Wolbring, G., Oscar Pistorius and the Future Nature of Olympic, Paralympic and Other Sports. SCRIPTed – A Journal of Law, Technology & Society 2008, 5 (1), 139-160.
  40. Wolbring, G., The Politics of Ableism. Development 2008, 51 (2), 252-258.
  41. Wolbring, G., “Is there an end to out-able? Is there an end to the rat race for abilities?”. Journal: Media and Culture 2008, 11 (3).
  42. Wolbring, G., Ableism, Enhancement Medicine and the techno poor disabled. In Unnatural Selection: The Challenges of Engineering Tomorrow’s People, Healey, P.; Rayner, S., Eds. Earthscan: 2008.
  43. Wolbring, G., One World, One Olympics: Governing Human Ability, Ableism and Disablism in an Era of Bodily Enhancements. In Human Futures: Art in the Age of Uncertainty, Miah, A., Ed. Liverpool University Press: Liverpool, 2008.
  44. Wolbring, G., A Disability Rights Approach Towards Sex Selection. Development 2006, 48 (4).
  45. Wolbring, G., The unenhanced underclass. In Better Humans? The politics of human enhancement, Wilsdon, J. M., P, Ed. Demos Institute: 2006.
  46. Wolbring, G. HTA Initiative #23 The triangle of enhancement medicine, disabled people, and the concept of health: a new challenge for HTA, health research, and health policy; Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research (AHFMR): Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research (AHFMR) webpage, 2005, 2005.http://www.ihe.ca/documents/HTA-FR23.pdf
  47. Wolbring, G., Ability Privilege: A Needed Addition to Privilege Studies. Journal for Critical Animal Studies 2014, 13 (2). P.118-141 http://www.crds.org/research/faculty/icasjustmine.pdf
  48. Cozzens, S. E., Distributive justice in science and technology policy. Science and Public Policy 2007, 34 (2), 85-94

49        Wolbring, G., & Yumakulov, S. (2015). Education through an Ability Studies Lens. Zeitschrift für Inklusion, 10(2), no page number. Retrieved from: http://www.inklusion-online.net/index.php/inklusion-online/article/view/278/261

50        Wolbring, G (2015) Human Enhancement verlangt die Auseinandersetzung mit Fähigkeitserwartungen in special issue “Schwerpunkt// Der optimierte Mensch in «Soziale Sicherheit CHSS» Social Security, Journal of the Federal Social Insurance Office, Switzerland Vol 16, Issue 1, p 16-19  http://www.bsv.admin.ch/dokumentation/publikationen/00096/03361/03362/index.html?lang=de The French version of full journal issue is  http://www.bsv.admin.ch/dokumentation/publikationen/00096/03361/03362/index.html?lang=fr  The English version Human Enhancement: The need for Ability Expectation Governance available upon request

51        Wolbring, G., & Diep, L. (2016). Cognitive/Neuroenhancement through an Ability Studies lens. In F. Jotterand & V. Dubljevic (Eds.), Cognitive Enhancement (pp. 57-75). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

52        Wolbring, G., & Ghai, A. (2015). Interrogating the impact of scientific and technological development on disabled children in India and beyond. Disability and the Global South, 2(2), 667-685.

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: