Access and tinkering: designing assistive technologies as political practice–A discussion with Zeynep Karagöz, Thomas Miebach and Daniel Wessolek

PurposeThis contribution shows perspectives of experts from different disciplines and professional backgrounds in order to elaborate on maker approaches such as do-it-yourself prosthetics and collaborative tools. As a result, aspects of open source practices related to medical and assistive technologies will be critically reflected upon. In addition, implications of heterogeneous interests, economic implications and everyday achievements of social material assemblages produced through participatory design research are discussed.Design/methodology/approachIn order to address an interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary perspective on the relationships between body (differences) and technology, it is necessary to bring together studies from both Science and Technology Studies (STS) and crip technoscience as well as approaches from participatory design research and practice. This challenge was addressed by a roundtable organized as part of the third network meeting of the Dis/Ability and Digital Media Research Network on 16 September 2020.FindingsAgainst the backdrop of “crip technoscience” DIY and collaborative open source practices are not only understood as valuable alternatives to standardized medical prosthetics and assistive devices. These bottom-up approaches which draw from the expert knowledge of disabled users (Hamraie and Fritsch, 2019) also facilitate devices that defy categories such as “prosthetic” or “medical aid” not only aesthetically but semantically, too.Originality/valueThe Network Dis/Abilities and Digital Media intends to integrate media and technology studies with disability studies on a theoretical level. This round table discussion delivers proof of how – on the practical level – technology and dis/ability need to be thought of as relational and co-constitutive (Mills and Sterne, 2017).