TY - JOUR
T1 - In defence of psychology: A reply to Goodley and Lawthom (2005)
AU - Forshaw, M.
PY - 2007/10/1
Y1 - 2007/10/1
N2 - Goodley & Lawthom discussed the role of a community psychology approach in conducting emancipatory disability research. While their aims are entirely laudable, they portrayed mainstream psychology as ‘pathologising, voyeuristic, individualising, [and] impairment‐obsessed’. This paper presents a reply to Goodley and Lawthom’s somewhat outdated arguments for the dismissal of mainstream psychology and argues that the focus on a single ‘best’ method of researching disability does not serve the best interests of disabled people within society. It is argued that to create a ‘new’ psychology distinct from the ‘mainstream’ is unnecessary, undesirable and counter‐productive. Mainstream psychology has much to offer disabled people and to dismiss it is to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
AB - Goodley & Lawthom discussed the role of a community psychology approach in conducting emancipatory disability research. While their aims are entirely laudable, they portrayed mainstream psychology as ‘pathologising, voyeuristic, individualising, [and] impairment‐obsessed’. This paper presents a reply to Goodley and Lawthom’s somewhat outdated arguments for the dismissal of mainstream psychology and argues that the focus on a single ‘best’ method of researching disability does not serve the best interests of disabled people within society. It is argued that to create a ‘new’ psychology distinct from the ‘mainstream’ is unnecessary, undesirable and counter‐productive. Mainstream psychology has much to offer disabled people and to dismiss it is to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-35148892104&partnerID=MN8TOARS
U2 - 10.1080/09687590701560287
DO - 10.1080/09687590701560287
M3 - Article (journal)
SN - 0968-7599
VL - 22
SP - 655
EP - 658
JO - Disability and Society
JF - Disability and Society
IS - 6
ER -