The self cannot be disabled because disability is something someone has. They may take it on board, the may make it a part of them and even wish for it to not change, yet, there is a separation between the disability and the self.

Society fails its individuals, generally and across the board. Specifically, in this case we are talking about disabilities. Deaf people for example have developed a culture of their own, this is clearly in part because of the failures of society to adapt, to change, accommodate, integrate, learn, etc. Cochlear implants remain a debate in the Deaf community because of the pride that is developed due to the separation that was created. There is an identity linked to deafness. In this sense many people who are not asking for the ability to hear, or to be ‘cured’ from their deafness may not see themselves as disabled.

What do we understand as the self? What elements of a disability can be part of someone’s self? I am autistic and also dyslexic. The way I process information, the way I express myself, understand the world, analyse, feel, essentially how my brain operates is intrinsically linked to its structure. Part of it is indeed me being neurodivergent. I cannot accept being autistic as a disability because it is intertwined with my Self in a way that is not distinguishable. I would be an entirely different person were I not to be autistic.

Furthermore, I have chronic pain, I experience pain at a low constant level from birth. Every second of my life. This has indeed affected me in numerous ways. Pain is linked to hormones, pain occurs in the brain regardless of tissue damage. Being exposed to pain through prolonged periods of time creates stress, trauma, depression, anxiety and other conditions. It has affected how I approach things, in many ways it has also affected my personality as I am more tentative than I think I might have been otherwise. It is fair to say that without my pain I would be a different person. Yet, I do consider my pain to be a disability because I do not experience it as something part of me but something I have. It is not a building block of my brain, it is not part of my thinking process but a reminder to revaluate in order to prevent additional damage, yet still not a personality trait.

Characteristic traits in autism that clash with social participation leads to the assumption that those ought to be worked on, improved, fixed. However, neurotypicals often struggle to recognise patterns for example. This is a tremendous issue for society that has caused numerous issues such as the perpetuation of capitalism. Because society is ruled by neurotypicals there is no expectation for such trait to be corrected of course. When a trait is assumed to require correction, it becomes a disability by default thus implying that the rooting cause for that trait must be a disability too.

We need to reconsider our understanding of disability, particularly when it comes to the mind. The body of a human is expected to meet certain characteristics, should those be different at birth or change during a lifetime, we would understand that person to have become disabled. This may include the loss of a limb. Beyond this marker, I do not see the purpose or even possible to find a way to define all physical disability as a person who is missing a limb may have abilities well beyond the majority of the population, as Paralympic athletes do. When it comes to the mind the discussion would likely divert into considering various forms and assessing levels of intelligence.

I do not argue against the idea of a disability in the body or the brain, but rather question the limitations of the concept and its applications. And more importantly, I insist on my original point which is that the self cannot be disabled. To move away from the notion that defines the person as disabled in the same way that we may refer to someone as ‘brown eyed’ because they have brown eyes but do not think of it as being part of the person but merely a physical characteristic.