Mike Oliver, ‘The Social Model in Action: if I had a hammer, ‘ in Implementing the Social Model of Disability: Theory and Research edited by Colin Barnes and Geof
Mercer (2004); Leeds: The Disability Press, pp. 18-31.
It is more than a little uncomfortable reading this given the last part of this article includes the sentence,
‘The real test will be in five or ten or fifteen years when it should be possible to determine its impact in improving the lives of disabled people in Birmingham.’
Given the impact that the last 20 years of financial crash, austerity, COVID and cost of living have had on disabled people, and that Birmingham City Council itself entered bankruptcy, it is hard to say how far the vision that Mike Oliver set out in 2004 has been given the opportunity to be fully ‘tested’ in its implementation. Or rather perhaps it has been ‘tested’ but the social aspect of the model has been more challenging to address than we might have thought. We are still using rubber hammers on an intractable iron nail.
But it was also interesting to read the background debate that had been fought in order to establish the idea of a ‘Social Model of Disability’. Whilst this idea has been taken up in many arenas (UAL’s own Disability Awareness staff training takes this approach; art’s organisations attempts to better welcome disabled audiences might be another), it has not perhaps been that long since the contrasting ‘individual model’, or ‘Medical model’ was still dominating discourse.
It was less than ten years since the Disability Discrimination Act of 1995 had been brought in. 6 years after Oliver’s article was published, this Act was repealed and replaced by the Equality Act of 2010. However activists such as Barbara Lisicki were and are critical of the legislation,
‘Some people thought “we’ve won with the Disability Discrimination Act”,’ says Lisicki. ‘We didn’t win. It was never a victory. All that I ever say to people is that at least now the government agrees with us that discrimination happens.’
Mike Oliver’s work is to make institutional and procedural change. This is to help change the relationship between disabled people and service providers. An example of this is what he calls a ‘Citizenship approach’. As an example, the ‘direct payments’ system in where disabled people can hire (and if needed, fire) their service providers. Direct Payments are still part of the landscape of provision for disabled people. We need more research to assess if this approach has been as empowering as imagined to be. We might also ask whether the payments are adequate.
But the broader general points about the social model that Oliver makes still stand.
To implement, he argues: ‘we need to work out and promote political strategies that are in line with the principles of the social model.’
Oliver’s prediction about the ‘death of social work’ in relation to the lives of disabled people… in a way it has not happened, but in a way it has. Health and Social Care is indeed in crisis, it remains to be seen, post-covid19, post-recession, how this will be addressed by a new Starmer-lead labour government (especially as it is likely there are strong political arguments for increases to defence budgets that might win out over welfare…). More thinking about the “political strategies” might be needed.
And what about in education? We can continue to work on dismantling barriers where possible. We must also keep in mind this wider set of social challenges affecting the support for disabled people to access education. Within internal training and practice at UAL there is already an understanding of some ways to help dismantling barriers. Learning materials can be provided in multiple formats. Asynchronous planning for participation may support students both with and without disabilities to access courses. Digital teaching and courses may enable new audiences to participate. In addition, work taken to highlight existing barriers and make alternative forms of access more transparent can help.
Many artists also choose to make art that encourages conversation about disabling aspects of society and the artworld, in playful in curious ways. The best of it speaks way beyond the question of disability per se. Which is what the ‘social’ bit, is about. I was privileged to have Joseph Grigley as a teacher, who is just one example of artists working in this field.
—
Battersea Arts Centre (2020) ‘Relaxed Venue’. Available at https://bac.org.uk/relaxed-venue/ (Accessed 7 March 2025)
Disabled People Against the Cuts (2024) ‘Being the boss: Workshops for individual employers and those recieving direct payments,’ https://dpac.uk.net/2024/09/being-the-boss-workshops-for-individual-employers-and-those-receiving-direct-payments/ (Accessed 7 March 2025)
Grigley, J. (2018). ‘Thank You: On What it Means to Care’ , Talk at Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, Available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vG_cZjUP088 (Accessed 7 March 2025)
Oliver, M. (2004). ‘The Social Model in Action: if I had a hammer’ in Barnes, C. and Mercer, G. (ed.) Implementing the Social Model of Disability: Theory and Research Leeds: The Disability Press, pp. 18-31.
Rose, D. (2015). When disabled people took to the streets to change the law, BBC News Online, Available at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/disability-34732084 (Accessed 7 March 2025)
Stanford Graduate School of Education (2025). What is synchronous and asynchronous learning? Available at https://teachingresources.stanford.edu/resources/what-is-synchronous-and-asynchronous-learning/ (Accessed online, 7 March 2025)