PubMed · 14645606
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
David M Baguley. 2003. Hyperacusis.. https://doi.org/10.1177/014107680309601203
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
This article examines why organizations struggle with learning how to prevent discrimination against their employees with disabilities. To explore this issue, qualitative archival data were collected and analyzed from 53 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) lawsuits filed against 44 organizations. Theoretical analysis of the qualitative data suggests that several organizationally based learning theories explain the difficulty organizations have with creating a disability-friendly work environment. These barriers to learning are embedded in complex defense mechanisms and discriminatory organizational routines. Furthermore, organizations have difficulties engaging in higher-order and vicarious learning. We conclude the article with examples of successful learning practices as they relate to barriers identified in the qualitative analysis.
This article argues that disabilities are, within many of the U.S. debates, best understood as certain kinds of impairment affecting a person's capabilities to perform socially defined roles and functions within specific environments. We also argue that it is not the impairments per se that lead to claims about what we ought to do or ought not do for people with disabilities. Rather, it is only within the context of capabilities being linked to the concept of freedom--almost universally valued in the current U.S. socio-political environment--that disability issues take on an ethical tenor. Additionally, we link the notion of disability to that of social capital. In particular, we argue that any social organization that discriminates against people with disabilities by attenuating their opportunities within that environment also decreases the social cohesion that exists within that organization. Such corporate climates promote organizational structures and processes that fail to optimize facilitation of the mutual benefits of the members. Finally, we discuss three different kinds of accommodation strategy: assistive technologies, systemic personal change, and universal design. We suggest a case-based (casuistic) approach to problems caused by disabilities. Using methods from both philosophy and public policy, we then build policies for accommodations incrementally, based on an application of those methods to the cases, and resulting in a more nuanced process enabling the creation of policies that take account of the experiences of both disabled and non-disabled people.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the views of organizations of and for disabled people in order to inform the writing of the British Society of Research Medicines policy document "Vocational Rehabilitation--The Way Forward". PATIENTS/ORGANIZATIONS: A single mailing was sent to 98 disability organizations within the UK. DESIGN: A semi-structured postal questionnaire focused on factors (i) within the National Health Service; (ii) external to it, mainly in the workplace, making it difficult for people to stay in work in the presence of disease/disability, or to find work after losing their job (within the last 6 months). RESULTS: A 30% response rate, with many incomplete questionnaires, was obtained so that 24 complete questionnaires were analysed. The dominant findings concerning the National Health Service were, overwhelmingly, that it was perceived as impacting deleteriously on the work of disabled people with delays to consultation, investigation and rehabilitation and a lack of appreciation of workplace issues. Employers were seen as unresponsive to the needs of workers, with negative attitudes to disability. The changes required in both areas were closely related to these findings. CONCLUSION: Though the organizations surveyed were not representative, nevertheless there was considerable agreement about the need for both the National Health Service and employers to be more responsive to the workplace needs of disabled people.