The ‘Undisclosed’ Subject of Normalization

Author: Teresa Żółkowska
Year of publication: 2016
Source: Show
Pages: 211-220
DOI Address:
PDF: tner/201604/tner20160418.pdf

The article is an attempt to present one of the most known concepts of disability, which, since the 60s of the 20t century, has been a significant and frequent subject of theoretical analysis as well as has been the hint in constructing the social policy or the organization of the welfare system for the disabled both in Poland and all over the world. In the article the American model of normalization will be presented and its deconstruction. Disclosing the problems concerning the theoretical assumptions of the concepts of this model allows for perceiving the way in which society constructs the subject of a disabled person.


  • Bank-Mikkelsen, N.E. (1969). A Metropolitan Area in Denmark: Copenhagen. (In:) Changing Patterns in Residential Services for the Mentally Retarded. (Eds.), R. Kugel, Wolfensberger. Washington: D.C., pp. 51-70.
  • Booth, T., & Ainscow, M. (1998). From them to us: an international study of inclusion in education. London: Routledge.
  • Brown, H., & Walmsley, J. (1997). When “ordinary” isn’t enough: a review of the concept of normalization. (In:) J. Bornat, J. Johnson, C. Pereira, & F. Williams ( Eds.), Community care: A reader. London: Macmillan. Open University, pp. 227-236.
  • Culham, A., & Nind, M. (2003). Deconstructing normalization: Clearing the way for inclusion. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 28, (1), 65-78.
  • Danmark: law, (1959). Public law, Stat 192. Copenhagen: The Ministry of Justice.
  • Dubois, N. (1988). The norm of internality: Social valorization of internal explanations of behavior and reinforcements in young people. The Journal of Social Psychology, 128(4), 431-439.
  • Emerson, E. (1992). What is normalisation? (In:) H. Brown & H. Smith (Eds.), Normalisation: a reader for the nineties. London: Routledge, pp. 1-18.
  • Flynn, R.J., & Lemay, R.A. (1999). Normalization and Social Role Valorization at a quarter century: Evolution, impact and renewal. (In:) R.J. Flynn, & R.A. Lemay (Eds.), A quarter-century of Normalization and Social Role Valorization: Evolution and impact. Ottawa, ON: University of Ottawa Press, pp. 12-24.
  • Goodley, D. (2001). Learning difficulties, the social model of disability and impairment: challenging epistemologies. Disability & Society, 16 (2), 207-231.
  • Hughes, B., & Paterson, K. (1997). The Social Model of Disability and the Disappearing Body: Towards a Sociology of Impairment. Disability & Society, 12(3), 325-340.
  • Marks, D. (1999). Dimensions of Oppression: Theorising the Embodied Subject. Disability & Society, 14(5), 661-626. Morris,J. (1991). Pride against prejudice. London: The Women’s Press.
  • Nirje, B. (1970). The normalisation principle—implications and comments. Journal of Mental Subnormality, 16, 62-70.
  • Nirje, B. (1976). The normalization principle and its human management implications.
  • (In:) R.B. Kugel, & A. Shearer (Eds.), Changing patterns in residential services for the mentally retarded, Washington, DC: President’s Committee on Mental Retardation. 2nd edn., pp. 231-252.
  • Nirje, B. (1980). The normalization principle. (In:) R.J. Flynn, & K.E. Nitsch (Eds.), Normalization, social integration and community services. Baltimore: University Park Press, pp. 31-49.
  • Nirje, B. (1985). The basis and logic of the normalization principle. Australia & New Zealand Journal of Developmental Disabilities, 11, 65-68.
  • Osburn, J. (2006). An overview of Social Role Valorization Theory. The SRV Journal, 1(1), 4-13.
  • Race, D.G. (1999). Hearts and minds: Social role valorization, UK academia and services for people with a learning disability. Disability & Society, 14(4), 519-538.
  • Race, D.G., & Carson, K. (2005). Towards a dialogue for practice: Reconciling Social Role Valorization and the Social Model of Disability. Disability & Society, 20(5), 507-521.
  • Szivos, S. (1992). The limits to integration? (In:) H. Brown, & H. Smith (Eds.), Normalisation: A Reader for the Nineties. London: Routledge, pp. 112-134.
  • Thomas, G., & Loxley, A. (2001). Deconstructing special education and constructing inclusion. Buckingham: Open University.
  • Thomas, S. (1999). The impact of normalization-related and/or SRV-related training as a vehicle of personal, service, and policy change. (In:) R.J. Flynn, & R. Lemay (Eds.), A Quarter-Century of Normalization and Social Role Valorization. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press, pp. 305-316.
  • Thomas, S., & Wolfensberger, W. (1999). An Overview of Social Role Valorization, (In:) R.J. Flynn, & R. Lemay (Eds.), A Quarter-Century of Normalization and Social Role Valorization. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press, pp. 13-28.
  • Wolfensberger, W. (1972). The principle of normalization in human services, Toronto: National Institute on Mental Retardation.
  • Wolfensberger, W., & Glen, S. (1973a). Program Analysis of Service Systems (PASS), Vol-
  • ume 1. Handbook, 2ⁿd ed. Toronto: NIMR.
  • Wolfensberger, W., & Glen, S. (1973b). Program Analysis of Service Systems (PASS), Vol-
  • ume 2. A Handbook, Toronto: NIMR.
  • Wolfensberger, W., & Glen, S. (1975). PASS 3: Program Analysis of Service Systems: a method for the quantitative evaluation of human services. A handbook. Toronto: NIMR.
  • Wolfensberger, W. (1980a). The definition of normalization: Update, problems, disagreements, and misunderstandings. (In:) R.J. Flynn, & K.E. Nitsch (Eds.), Normalization, social integration and community services. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press. pp. 71-115
  • Wolfensberger, W. (1980b). Research, empiricism, and the principle of normalization.
  • (In:) R.J. Flynn, & K.E. Nitsch, (Eds), Normalization, social integration, and community services, Baltimore, MD: University Park Press, pp. 117-129.
  • Wolfensberger, W. (1983). Social role valorization: a proposed new term for the principle of normalization. Mental Retardation, 21(6), 234-239
  • Yates, S., Dyson, S., & Hiles, D. (2008). Beyond normalization and impairment: Theorizing subjectivity in learning difficulties-Theory and practice. Disability & Society, 2008, 23(3), 247-258.
  • Żółkowska, T. (2015). Construction of the intellectual disability. (De)construction of the social role of intellectually disabled persons, International Journal of Developmental Disabilities (British Journal of Developmental Disabilities), 06 (61), pp. 1-11.

disability normalization ’Undisclosed’ Subject

Message to:



© 2017 Adam Marszałek Publishing House. All rights reserved.

Projekt i wykonanie Pollyart