A turn toward social solidarity in research with disabled children

Authors

  • Sirkka Komulainen Kaakkois-Suomen ammattikorkeakoulu
  • Pilvi Elina Hämeenaho Itä-Suomen yliopisto

Keywords:

disability studies, childhood studies, inclusion, children's rights, social solidarity

Abstract

This review article looks into certain paradigmatic developments in research with disabled children. We are concerned with certain understandings and definitions that affect how we do research with a ‘disabled child’. We take a look into changes in definitions of disability and the impact of such definitions on practices especially in the context of educational inclusion. Definitions and research orientations have developed alongside changes in the social status of disabled people. Since the 1980s increasing attention has been paid in research to children’s rights and agency instead of vulnerability. At the same time, neoliberal discourses that emphasize individual rights have also been critiqued for overlooking children’s needs, the effects of disabilities and societal responsibilities. Drawing on the so-called (broadly Anglo-American) “social model of disability”, we also bring forth the latest turn in research with disabled children that calls for a value-based move from the individual to the societal. This turn has added concepts such as “social solidarity” and “interdependence” into research orientations instead of those stressing children’s rights and agency. Such research orientations that may at first appear rather contradictory need not however be seen as mutually exclusive; nor is social solidarity to negate the importance of rights-based orientations. Instead, the new turn stresses the recognition of the importance of the societal approach. This, in turn, will advance the social participation of disabled people, as well as social inclusion more widely.

Section
Katsaukset

Published

2019-12-20

How to Cite

Komulainen, S., & Hämeenaho, P. (2019). A turn toward social solidarity in research with disabled children. Kasvatus & Aika, 13(4), 65–75. https://doi.org/10.33350/ka.76842