• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

Dismantling the disability/handicap distinction.

作者信息

Edwards S D

机构信息

Centre for Philosophy and Health Care, University of Wales Swansea, U.K.

出版信息

J Med Philos. 1997 Dec;22(6):589-606. doi: 10.1093/jmp/22.6.589.

DOI:10.1093/jmp/22.6.589
PMID:9501284
Abstract

This paper discusses the distinction between disability and handicap as it is proposed by the World Health Organization (WHO) in their publication International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps (WHO, 1993 (first published, 1980)). Following criticism of this an attempt to salvage the distinction by Nordenfelt (1993, 1983) is discussed. It is argued that neither the WHO nor Nordenfelt are successful in their attempts to preserve the distinction between disability and handicap in a theoretically well-motivated manner. Contrary to the WHO, it is argued that what they term 'disabilities' and 'handicaps' both have external causes. And contrary to Nordenfelt's position it is shown that "basic actions" do not provide a firm theoretical foundation for the concept of disability. Moreover, the criticisms of these two sets of views reveal that attempts to describe the phenomenon of disablement which focus on the individual suffer from a serious methodological shortcoming.

摘要

相似文献

1
Dismantling the disability/handicap distinction.
J Med Philos. 1997 Dec;22(6):589-606. doi: 10.1093/jmp/22.6.589.
2
The importance of a disability/handicap distinction.残疾与残障区分的重要性。
J Med Philos. 1997 Dec;22(6):607-22. doi: 10.1093/jmp/22.6.607.
3
Nordenfelt's theory of disability.诺登费尔特的残疾理论。
Theor Med Bioeth. 1998 Jan;19(1):89-100. doi: 10.1023/a:1009942512459.
4
The International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps (ICIDH)--results and problems.《国际损伤、残疾和残障分类》(ICIDH)——结果与问题
Int J Rehabil Res. 1996 Mar;19(1):1-11. doi: 10.1097/00004356-199603000-00001.
5
An introduction to the concepts and classifications of the international classification of impairments, disabilities, and handicaps.《国际损伤、残疾和残障分类》的概念与分类介绍。
Disabil Rehabil. 1993 Oct-Dec;15(4):161-78. doi: 10.3109/09638289309166008.
6
Models of disablement, universalism and the international classification of impairments, disabilities and handicaps.残疾模型、普遍主义与《国际损伤、残疾和残障分类》
Soc Sci Med. 1999 May;48(9):1173-87. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(98)00441-9.
7
The development of the International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities, and Handicaps in France.
Int Disabil Stud. 1989 Oct-Dec;11(4):175-7. doi: 10.3109/03790798909166673.
8
Towards a new ICIDH. International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps.迈向新的《国际损伤、残疾和残障分类》(ICIDH)。
Disabil Rehabil. 2000 Feb 15;22(3):144-56. doi: 10.1080/096382800297006.
9
The ICIDH: format, application in different settings, and distinction between disability and handicap. A critique of papers on the application of the International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities, and Handicaps.
Int Disabil Stud. 1987;9(3):122-5. doi: 10.3109/03790798709166338.
10
Reflection on the definition of impairment and disability as defined by the World Health Organization.对世界卫生组织所定义的损伤和残疾的反思。
Disabil Rehabil. 1995 Apr-Jun;17(3-4):119-27. doi: 10.3109/09638289509166706.

引用本文的文献

1
Naturalism and the social model of disability: allied or antithetical?自然主义与残疾的社会模型:盟友还是对立?
J Med Ethics. 2015 Jul;41(7):553-6. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2014-102127. Epub 2014 Oct 23.