Biopolitics of disability determination: Consequences of austere biomedical assessment regimes

IF 1.5 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Global Social Policy Pub Date : 2022-12-30 DOI:10.1177/14680181221145824
V. Chaudhry
{"title":"Biopolitics of disability determination: Consequences of austere biomedical assessment regimes","authors":"V. Chaudhry","doi":"10.1177/14680181221145824","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Social protection policies for disabled people are in crisis, as governments across the world have implemented neoliberal reforms that curtail the scope of support by limiting social safety nets and producing stricter criteria for who counts as disabled. The financial crisis of 2008 in the global north caused governments to enforce austerity measures, which were subsequently exported to the global south (Martins, 2020). These austerity measures have ushered in stringent eligibility standards to limit who should be considered disabled, compounding the precarity of disabled people globally as they are required to undergo intense scrutiny and testing to prove their disability and access necessary support. Determining disability is at the heart of the crises of disability social protection policies. To address these crises, it is critical to understand the biopolitics of disabilitymaking that states rely on to manage their own resources. To this end, this article explores the processes states employ to demarcate the boundaries around the category of disability. Drawing from existing literature as well as my research on disability and social protection in India, I examine the challenges of state-sanctioned disability determination processes, which view disability through the lens of the medical model. States rely on austere assessment regimes to restrict who ‘counts’ as disabled, allowing them to accumulate resources. By governing populations across the lines of capacity and incapacity, these biopolitical processes produce disabled body-minds that can be forced into the labor market (Foucault, 1980). This results in two significant consequences: first, fewer people who need social protections receive them; second, these biopolitical processes actively narrow the category of disability itself. Finally, this article concludes by analyzing potential ways forward for disability researchers and policy-makers.","PeriodicalId":46041,"journal":{"name":"Global Social Policy","volume":"23 1","pages":"176 - 179"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Social Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14680181221145824","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Social protection policies for disabled people are in crisis, as governments across the world have implemented neoliberal reforms that curtail the scope of support by limiting social safety nets and producing stricter criteria for who counts as disabled. The financial crisis of 2008 in the global north caused governments to enforce austerity measures, which were subsequently exported to the global south (Martins, 2020). These austerity measures have ushered in stringent eligibility standards to limit who should be considered disabled, compounding the precarity of disabled people globally as they are required to undergo intense scrutiny and testing to prove their disability and access necessary support. Determining disability is at the heart of the crises of disability social protection policies. To address these crises, it is critical to understand the biopolitics of disabilitymaking that states rely on to manage their own resources. To this end, this article explores the processes states employ to demarcate the boundaries around the category of disability. Drawing from existing literature as well as my research on disability and social protection in India, I examine the challenges of state-sanctioned disability determination processes, which view disability through the lens of the medical model. States rely on austere assessment regimes to restrict who ‘counts’ as disabled, allowing them to accumulate resources. By governing populations across the lines of capacity and incapacity, these biopolitical processes produce disabled body-minds that can be forced into the labor market (Foucault, 1980). This results in two significant consequences: first, fewer people who need social protections receive them; second, these biopolitical processes actively narrow the category of disability itself. Finally, this article concludes by analyzing potential ways forward for disability researchers and policy-makers.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
残疾认定的生物政治学:严格的生物医学评估制度的后果
针对残疾人的社会保护政策正处于危机之中,因为世界各国政府都实施了新自由主义改革,通过限制社会安全网和制定更严格的残疾人标准来限制支持范围。2008年全球北方的金融危机导致各国政府实施紧缩措施,这些措施随后被出口到全球南方(Martins,2020)。这些紧缩措施引入了严格的资格标准,以限制谁应该被视为残疾人,这加剧了全球残疾人的不确定性,因为他们需要接受严格的审查和测试,以证明自己的残疾并获得必要的支持。确定残疾是残疾社会保护政策危机的核心。为了解决这些危机,了解各州管理自身资源所依赖的致残生物政治至关重要。为此,本文探讨了各州为划定残疾类别的界限而采用的程序。根据现有文献以及我对印度残疾和社会保护的研究,我考察了国家批准的残疾确定过程的挑战,这些过程从医学模式的角度看待残疾。各国依靠严格的评估制度来限制谁“被视为”残疾人,从而使他们能够积累资源。通过跨越能力和丧失能力的界限来管理人口,这些生物政治过程产生了残疾的身心,这些身心可能被迫进入劳动力市场(福柯,1980)。这导致了两个重大后果:首先,需要社会保护的人越来越少;其次,这些生物政治过程积极地缩小了残疾本身的范畴。最后,本文通过分析残疾研究人员和政策制定者的潜在前进道路得出结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Global Social Policy
Global Social Policy POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: Global Social Policy is a fully peer-reviewed journal that advances the understanding of the impact of globalisation processes upon social policy and social development on the one hand, and the impact of social policy upon globalisation processes on the other hand. The journal analyses the contributions of a range of national and international actors, both governmental and non-governmental, to global social policy and social development discourse and practice. Global Social Policy publishes scholarly policy-oriented articles and reports that focus on aspects of social policy and social and human development as broadly defined in the context of globalisation be it in contemporary or historical contexts.
期刊最新文献
Social sustainability in the decarbonized welfare state: Social policy as a buffer against poverty related to environmental taxes When growth is not enough: Do government transfers moderate the effect of economic growth on absolute and relative child poverty? Social policy as knowledge process: How its sociotechnical links to labour reconfigure the social question An eco-social policy typology: From system reproduction to transformation Reflexivity in global social policy: Introduction to the special issue
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1