Acta Iuris Stetinensis

Previously: Zeszyty Naukowe. Roczniki Prawnicze

ISSN: 2083-4373    eISSN: 2545-3181    OAI    DOI: 10.18276/ais.2026.57-02
CC BY-SA   Open Access   DOAJ  ERIH PLUS  DOAJ

Issue archive / 1/2026 (57)
Traces of the medical and social models in disability definitions in international legislation and EU policy

Authors: Weronika Kuroń
Keywords: definitions of disability international law models of disability evolution of the perception of disability
Whole issue publication date:2026
Page range:14 (23-36)
Klasyfikacja JEL: Z18
Cited-by (Crossref) ?:
Downloads ?: 132

Abstract

This publication aims to examine the process of evolution of disability definitions within the framework of international legislation and EU policy in order to establish in light of which disability model the contemporary disability definitions have been shaped. While medical and social models offer distinct approaches to defining disability, they are both associated with significant shifts in societal perceptions and have, at various points over recent decades, been reflected in international regulations. Furthermore, their model variations continue to influence the shaping of existing disability definitions, the scope of rights and freedoms granted to individuals with disabilities and the public policy. This article puts an emphasis on tracing the development of disability definitions in international legislation and politics influenced by these models to determine what factors have solidified the formation of the contemporary legislative approach to defining disability. To achieve this research objective, the method of interpretation of the law in force and of views of legal scholars and commentators have been employed along with comparative, linguistic, and historical legal research methods. The use of these methods has helped to demonstrate that although the majority of existing disability definitions now adhere to the principles of the social and human rights model – particularly due to the establishment of the UN Convention of the Rights of People with Disabilities – utilising knowledge from all models should not be disregarded as it may help to find the most appropriate solutions to ensure the equal opportunities for people with disabilities within society.
Download file

Article file

Bibliography

1.Barnes C., Mercer G., Niepełnosprawność, Warsaw 2008.
2.Cała-Wacinkiewicz E., Od konstytucyjne wywodzonej dostępności w stronę prawa do dostępności?, "Przegląd Prawa Konstytucyjnego” 2023, No. 6.
3.Cała-Wacinkiewicz E., Zakaz dyskryminacji konstrukcyjnym elementem racjonalnych usprawnień w kontekście praw osób z niepełnosprawnościami, "Przegląd Prawa Konstytucyjnego” 2024, No. 5.
4.European Court of Auditors, Special report: Supporting persons with disabilities. Practi-cal impact of EU action is limited, 2023, https://www.eca.europa.eu/en/publications? ref=sr-2023-20.
5.Fal D.M., Znaczenie klasyfikacji ICF w opisie niepełnosprawności, “Wiadomości Ubezpieczeniowe” 2018, Vol. 1.
6.Gawron G., Universal Design – projektowanie uniwersalne jako idea w dążeniu do osiągania partycypacji społecznej osób niepełnosprawnych, “Roczniki Nauk Społecznych” 2015, Vol. 7 (43), No. 1.
7.Giełda M., Pojęcie niepełnosprawności, in: M. Giełda, R. Raszewska-Skałecka (eds.), Prawno-administracyjne aspekty sytuacji osób niepełnosprawnych w Polsce, Wrocław 2015.
8.Kayess R., French P., Out of Darkness into Light: Introducing the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, “Human Rights Law Review” 2008, Vol. 8, Issue 1.
9.Kolwitz M., Dąbrowski S., Postawy wobec niepełnosprawności fizycznej w okresie średniowiecza, “Roczniki Pomorskiej Akademii Medycznej w Szczecinie” 2014, Vol. 60 (1).
10.Oliver M., A New Model of the Social Work Role in Relation to Disability, in: J. Campling (ed.), The Handicapped Person: A New Perspective for Social Workers, London 1981.
11.Petasis A., Discrepancies of the Medical, Social and Biopsychosocial Models of Disability; A Comprehensive Theoretical Framework, “The International Journal of Business Management and Technology” 2019, Vol. 3, Issue 4.
12.Quinn G., Degener T., The Moral Authority for Change: Human Rights Values and the World¬wide Process of Disability Reform, in: G. Quinn, T. Degener et al. (eds.), Human Rights and Disability: The Current Use and Future Potential of Human Rights Instruments in the Context of Disability, UN New York and Geneva 2002.
13.Twardowski A., Społeczny model niepełnosprawności – analiza krytyczna, “Studia Edu-kacyjne” 2018, No. 48.
14.UPIAS, Fundamental Principles of Disability, 1976, https://disability-studies.leeds.ac.uk/ wp-content/uploads/sites/40/library/UPIAS-fundamental-principles.pdf.
15.Waddington L., Equal to the Task? Re-examining EU Equality Law in Light of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, in: L. Waddington, G. Quinn and E. Flynn (eds.), European Yearbook of Disability Law, Antwerp/Portland 2013.
16.Waddington L., Broderick A., Court Practices Regarding Disability Discrimination, Including Reasonable Accommodation, at EU and Member State Level, and in Light of the UN CRPD, 2023, https://www.migpolgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/ Court-Practices-Disability-Discrimination_web_Final.pdf.
17.WHO, Towards a Common Language for Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF, WHO/ EIP/GPE/CAS/01.3, done at Geneva in 2002.
18.WHO, World report on disability: summary, 2011.
19.Wieruszewski R., Konwencja Narodów Zjednoczonych o prawach osób niepełnosprawnych w polskim porządku prawnym, in: A.M. Waszkielewicz (ed.), Polska droga do Konwencji o prawach osób niepełnosprawnych ONZ, Kraków 2008.