Discourse on Disability and Rehabilitation Issues: Opportunities for Psychology

American Psychologist

Volumn 58, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 279-284

  Pledger, Constance ^a  

^a Department of Health and Human Services   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DISABILITY; HUMAN; MENTAL DISEASE; MENTAL HEALTH SERVICE; METHODOLOGY; NOMENCLATURE; PSYCHOLOGY;

DISABILITY EVALUATION; HUMANS; MENTAL DISORDERS; MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES; PSYCHOLOGY; TERMINOLOGY;

EID: 0041850108     PISSN: 0003066X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.58.4.279     Document Type: Review

References (21)

1. Americans With Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. (1990).
2. Brandt, E. N., & Pope, A. M. (Eds.). (1997). Enabling America: Assessing the role of rehabilitation science and engineering. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
3. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American Psychologist, 32, 513-531.
4. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments in nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
5. Bush, G. W. (2001). New Freedom Initiative. Retrieved May 7, 2003, from http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/freedominitiative/freedominitiative.html
6. Engel, G. (1977, April 8). The need for a new medical model: A challenge to biomedicine. Science, 196, 129-136.
7. Gill, C. J., Kewman, D. G., & Brannon, R. W. (2003). Transforming psychological practice and society: Policies that reflect the new paradigm. American Psychologist, 58, 305-312.
8. Jette, A. M., & Badley, E. (2000). Conceptual issues in the measurement of work disability. In N. Mathiowetz & G. S. Wunderlich (Eds.), Survey measurement of work disability: Summary of a workshop (pp. 4-27). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
9. Mathiowetz, N. (2000). Methodological issues in the measurement of work disability. In N. Mathiowetz & G. S. Wunderlich (Eds.), Survey measurement of work disability: Summary of a workshop (pp. 28-52). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
10. Melia, R. P., Pledger, C., & Wilson, R. (2003). Disability and rehabilitation research: Opportunities for participation, collaboration, and extramural funding for psychologists. American Psychologist, 58, 285-288.
11. Nagi, S. Z. (1976). An epidemiology of disability among adults in the United States. Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly: Health and Society, 54, 439-468.
12. Olkin, R., & Pledger, C. (2003). Can disability studies and psychology join hands? American Psychologist, 58, 296-304.
13. Olmstead v. L.C., 527 U.S. 581 (1999).
14. Pope, A. M., & Tarlov, A. R. (Eds.). (1991). Disability in America: Toward a national agenda for prevention. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
15. Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Pub. L. No. 93-112, 87 Stat. 355 (1973).
16. Tate, D. G., & Pledger, C. (2003). An integrative conceptual framework of disability: New directions for research. American Psychologist, 58, 289-295.
17. Trieschmann, R. B. (1987). Aging with a disability. New York: Demos Publications.
18. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research. (2000). Long-range plan 1999-2003. Washington, DC: Author.
19. Verbrugge, L., & Jette, A. (1994). The disablement process. Social Science and Medicine, 38, 1-14.
20. World Health Organization. (1980). International classification of impairments, disabilities, and handicaps: A manual of classification relating to the consequences of disease. Geneva, Switzerland: Author.
21. World Health Organization. (2001). International classification of functioning, disability, and heath. Geneva, Switzerland: Author.