Ability Expectation/Ableism glossary

Ability Studies as I set it up since 2008 (our 82 papers using ability expectation/ableism/ability studies as a lens listed at the end. They are Not equal the cited ones under the different sections).

Ability studies investigates how ability expectation (want stage) and ableism (need stage) hierarchies and preferences come to pass and the impact of such hierarchies and preferences. [1]. Within it, it allows to investigate eco-ability expectations and eco-ableism that focuses on ecological dynamics of human-human; human-animal and human-environment relationships [2,5]. Ability studies also engages with how ability expectations and ableism starts to play itself out on the intersections of humans-post/transhumans, humans-cyborg humans and human-non sentient machines [17]. And if advancements in artificial intelligence and machine learning really achieve what is envisioned ability expectations and ableism will impact human-sentient machine, animal-sentient machine and nature-sentient machine relationships [17].

For two other ability based studies streams with a different focus see Fiona Campbell’s studies in ableism and Dan Goodly’s Critical studies of ableism. Also of interest Talila A Lewis

Ability Studies allows for the study of multiple subject formations, social relationships, and lived experiences based on diverse ability expectations and the actions linked to such expectations. It encourages the study of how legal, ethical/moral, biological, cultural and social constructs are exhibiting ability expectations and how such ability expectations and the actions they trigger lead to an ability based and ability justified understanding of oneself, one’s body and one’s relationship with others of one’s species, other species and one’s environment [1,4]. Ability studies can be used in inter-, trans- and intra- disciplinarily and inter (between groups) and intra (sub groups within group) sectional ways to generate policies and advance the relationship between humans, animals and their environment [1,2,5].

In short ability studies focus on the investigation of ability-based expectations, judgments, norms, and conflicts [5].

Ability expectation and Ableism (AA)  have a timeline: it starts with •Emerging/eclectic (ability  expectation) which can move to the stage of •nice to have (ability expectation) of which some move to the stage of •essential to have (ableism). Then some will move to the stage of •on the way out-eclectic (ability  expectation obsolescence) [18]. Different societies •Hunter gatherer/ agricultural/  industrial/knowledge society/post  knowledge society have different ability expectations [7].

Different groups of people often have different ability expectations [20]

Ability expectation: One likes as an individual or as a social structure to have a certain ability

Ableism: One perceives as an individual or as a social structure certain abilities as essential

Internalized ableism coined by Fiona Campbell in 2008 see here and in 2009 here “the distancing of disabled people from each other (dispersal) and the adoption by disabled people of ableist norms (emulation) page 22 in here.

Internalized Ableism is in the way I use it however also evident in how so called non-disabled people might judge themselves and internalize their ability judgments by others. For example many women internalized the ability judgments by men that women do not have the ability of rationality (like suffragette movement fight for women voting rights).

Techno-ableism (“a rhetoric of disability that at once talks about empowering disabled people through technologies while at the same time reinforcing ableist tropes about what body-minds are good”) Shew, A. Ableism, Technoableism, and Future AI. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine 2020, 39, 40-85, doi:10.1109/MTS.2020.2967492. and Shew, A. How To Get A Story Wrong: Technoableism, Simulation, and Cyborg Resistance. Available online here:

Ability expectations can be used to disable and enable

Disablism was coined with the meaning of “discriminatory, oppressive or abusive behavior arising from the belief that disabled people are inferior to others” Miller, Paul, Sarah Parker, and Sophia Gillinson. 2004. Disablism: How to tackle the last prejudice. London: Demos page 9 see here;

I use the term again broader.

Disablism: A given irrelevant ability expectation or ableism is used by an individual or a social group/structure to disabled the one without that ability or wrongly label others as not having that ability [5,19] or systemic discrimination based on arbitrary ability judgments or ability judgments based on or rooted in ability privilege and/or irrelevant ability norm [5]. For example men used the ability expectation of ‘rationality’ to a) falsely claim that women are not rational and b) then used that false claim to deny women the right to vote (disablism).

Anti-Disablism: the fight against the systemic discrimination based on arbitrary ability judgments or ability judgments based on or rooted in ability privilege and/or irrelevant ability norms

Anti- Disablism: in short acting to decrease disablism based on irrelevant or arbitrary ability norms and expectations set by a powerful social entity (individual or group)

Anti-disableist or Anti-disablist: taking action as a social entity (individual or group) to decrease the disabling use of irrelevant or arbitrary ability norms and expectations set by powerful social entities or individuals. It has to include being aware of the various ability realities as outline below such as ability privilege.

Active disablism: One actively tries to generate social conditions that disable the one without a given irrelevant ability or where one generates new ability expectations with the expressed purpose to generate a hierarchy between social groups with one being the dominant one. So the primary purpose is to disable one based on the difference in abilities (perceived or real)

Omission or passive disablism: One disables someone else due to simply not being aware, not thinking about it. The primary purpose was not to generate the disablement due to ability differences (perceived or real) but it’s a side effect of not thinking, not being aware of the consequences of ones ability expectations

Passive disablism can become active disablism and vice versa

Internalized disablism One internalizes the disabling use of ability judgments as just and right (for some papers (focusing on disabled people see here, here, here, here, here and here.)

I see it as a general dynamic For example men used the ability expectation of ‘rationality’ to a) falsely claim that women are not rational and b) then used that false claim to deny women the right to vote (disablism). The internalized part is that women believed that they are not rational (internalized ableism) AND also believed that they should not vote (internalized disablism).

Transhumanized Techno-disablism: being discriminated because one cannot or does not want to upgrade beyond the species-typical

Techno-disablism: being discriminated because one cannot or does not want to use technologies to ‘fix’ ones perceived impairment

With transhumanism in mind

“techno-poor disabled” (being discriminated because one cannot or does not want to upgrade beyond the species-typical (Wolbring, G. The unenhanced underclass. In Better Humans? The politics of human enhancement, Wilsdon, J.M., P, Ed. Demos Institute: London, UK, 2006; pp. 122-129.; Wolbring, G. Ableism, Enhancement Medicine and the techno poor disabled. In Unnatural Selection: The Challenges of Engineering Tomorrow’s People, Healey, P., Rayner, S., Eds. Earthscan: 2008; pp. 196-208)

Another version

Techno-poor disabled: One is discriminated because one does not use (on purpose or because one can mot afford them) technologies

Techno poor impaired person) as in: Everyone who identifies oneself or is labelled by others as being deficient because one is not able to improve oneself beyond Homo sapiens normative functioning through technological means” ;

Techno-poor impaired: as in: Everyone who identifies oneself or is labelled by others as being deficient because one is not able or does not want to use technologies

Ability related enablism

Enablism: A given ability expectation or ableism is used by an individual or a social group/structure to enable other individuals  or social structures

Enableist or Enablist Use ability expectations or ableism to enable other individuals  or social structures

Internalized Enablism: using a given ability expectation or ableism becomes an unconscious effort so ones “second nature”

The issue of anxiety and burnout

Disablism Anxiety: According to the American Psychological Association, anxiety is about “feelings of tension and worried thoughts” and concerns, which could lead to the reaction that people might avoid doing certain things due to that worry. Anxiety is also future-oriented and a long-acting response [47](citation number is from our paper below Wolbring, G., & Escobedo, M. (2023). Academic Coverage of Social Stressors Experienced by Disabled People: A Scoping Review. Societies, 13(9), 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc13090211)

Therefore disablism anxiety could be defined as “feelings of tension and worried thoughts, due to experiencing disablism or due to anticipating disablism. Because of disablism anxiety people may avoid certain situations out of worry such as why going somewhere if accessibility is not guaranteed”.

Linked to disablism anxiety are issues that are disabling like accessibility anxiety (anxious something is not accessible) (see for example here ), ability security anxiety (that ones ability is not good enough to provide a good life), ability identity anxiety (that ones ability linked identity is not good enough), ability discrimination or disability oppression anxiety (that one anticipates oppression or discrimination based on ones ability). In essence all the negative ability expectation terms listed below can lead to ability expectation base anxiety and disablism anxiety.

Disablism burnout: (burnout due to experiencing systemic discrimination based on irrelevant ability norms)

Adaptation burnout: is a form of disablism burnout (burnout due to constantly having to adapt to irrelevant ability norms)

Disability burnout with the meaning of disablism burnout one quote of the disability studies scholar Carol Gill “Understandably these facts of disability oppression can take a toll on the morale of persons with disabilities.37 After struggling with employment bias, poverty, blocked access to the community and its resources, unaccommodating and selective health services, lack of accessible and affordable housing, penalizing welfare policies, and lack of accessible transportation, some may experience what is known in the disability community as ‘‘disability burn-out.’’ This term refers to emotional despair engendered by thwarted opportunities and blocked goals. It is aggravated and intensified by years of exposure to disability prejudice and devaluation. In fact, a frequently repeated theme in research interviews with persons with disabilities and illnesses is, ‘‘I can live with my physical condition but I’m tired of struggling against the way I’m treated’”. in Gill, C.J. Depression in the context of disability and the “right to die”. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 2004, 25, 171-198. (p. 180).

Scope of Ability expectation and Ableism

The concept of ableism was developed by the disabled people’s rights movement to question species-typical, normative irrelevant and/or arbitrary body ability expectations and the ability privileges (i.e. ability to work, to gain education, to be part of society, to have an identity, to be seen as citizen) that come with an ability normative species-typical body (although they did not use the term ability privilege) and the disablism the discriminatory, oppressive, or abusive behaviour against the sub species-typical people [5]

Many ableism papers focusing on disabled people here (not complete but a start). There are two other streams of ability based studies, Fiona Campbell’s studies in ableism and Dan Goodly’s Critical studies of ableism

However I suggest that ableism is a cultural reality exhibited beyond disabled people.

Moving beyond disabled people

Ableism exhibits in general a favouritism for certain abilities that are projected as ‘essential’ while at the same time labelling real or perceived deviation from or lack of these ‘essential’ abilities as problematic leading or contributing to the justification of a variety of other isms such as sexism, racism, castism, Age-ism and so forth [1, 4,5].

Here the claim is not about species-typical versus sub species-typical linked to the group of disabled people, but a general claim that one has – as a species or a social group- superior abilities compared to other species or other segments in ones species.

Moving beyond the body

Ableism exhibits in general a favouritism for certain abilities not per se defined as species-typical body abilities that are projected as essential for certain humans to exhibit while at the same time labelling real or perceived deviation from or lack of these essential abilities as problematic leading or contributing to the justification of a variety of other isms such as GDP-ism, consumer-ism, productivity-ism, competitiveness-ism  and so forth [1, 4, 5](just my paper of number 5 here).

Moving to the inclusion of human-animal and human-nature relationships

Eco-ableism is a conceptual framework for analysing enabling and disabling human ability desires, a class of desires that shape the relationship between humans, between humans and animals and humans and their environment [2, 5, 6, 14]. It allows to analyse and discuss which ability expectations and ableism are sustainable and put such ability expectation and ableism sustainability into the context of relationships between humans, between humans and animals and humans and their environment.

(see also Eco-ability first publication I think Nocella II AJ, Bentley JKC, Duncan JM, Others. The Rise of the Eco-Ability Movement New York, Bern, Berlin, Bruxelles, Frankfurt am Main, Oxford, Wien,: Peter Lang; 2012)

Moving beyond the species-typical norm

Human related: A set of beliefs, processes and practices that perceive the improvement of human body abilities beyond homo sapiens typical boundaries (species-typical and sub species-typical) as essential. This enhancement version of ableism, sees all human bodies as limited, defective and in need of constant improvement of their abilities beyond homo sapiens -typical boundaries. The  body ability enhancement can be of three types a) external by shaping the environment, b) internal reversal by modifying bodily structures in an reversible fashion and c) internal non-reversal by modifying bodily structures in a non-reversible fashion. This includes concepts such as the

Transhumanized impaired person as in: Everyone who identifies oneself or is labelled by others as being deficient because one is not able to improve oneself ability wise beyond Homo sapiens normative functioning.

Techno poor impaired person) as in: Everyone who identifies oneself or is labelled by others as being deficient because one is not able to improve oneself beyond Homo sapiens normative functioning through technological means” [21]-[22];

Transhumanized disabled person as in: someone who is not enhanced beyond Homo sapiens normative functioning and therefore encounters body structure/function related attitudinal and environmental barriers mostly justified by a transhumanized version of ableism that expects abilities beyond the species-typical that hinder one‟s full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others see also https://wolbring.wordpress.com/meaning-of-disability-body-image-person-and-health/

Techno poor disabled person as in: someone who is not techno enhanced beyond Homo sapiens normative functioning and therefore encounters body structure/function related attitudinal and environmental barriers mostly justified by a transhumanized version of ableism that expects abilities beyond the species-typical that hinder one‟s full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others or in other words (being discriminated because one cannot or does not want to upgrade beyond the species-typical) see also https://wolbring.wordpress.com/meaning-of-disability-body-image-person-and-health/

Animal related: A set of beliefs, processes and practices which champions the especially cognitive enhancement of animal species beyond species typical boundaries leading to cognitive or otherwise “enabled species‟.

Environment related: A set of beliefs, processes and practices which champions the a) enhancement of especially the Homo sapiens beyond species typical boundaries to cope with the environmental challenges to come b) shaping the environment (geo-engineering, gated biospheres…)

Moving beyond the negative aspect of Ability Expectation and Ableism

Exhibition of ability expectations or ableism’s can also have positive consequences(enablement/enablism)[7] and here. Ones desire to have the ability to live in an equitable society could be seen as a enabling ability expectation. Some see the concept of sustainable development as positive step in what humans expect ability wise from nature [7,12]. The capability approach can be interpreted as a list of positive abilities one is supposed to be able to act upon [12].  And many enabling abilities are linked to the concept of an active citizen [13].

Some Ability Studies concepts

 Ethics of Ableism/Ableism Ethics is a “framework of standards and values that (a) guide beliefs, processes and practices that produces based on ones abilities a particular kind of understanding of oneself, one’s body and one’s relationship with others of one’s species, other species and one’s environment and includes one being judged by others; (b) guide the favouritism for certain abilities and how one decide which abilities to favour over others; (c) guide the reactions towards humans and other biological entities that are seen -real or perceived- to lack these essential abilities. whatever set of abilities one has, and that one will not be forced to have a prescribed set of abilities to live a secure life” Ableism/Ableism Ethics, also includes (a) the study of those standards and values, incorporating the perspectives of many different groups especially of the people labelled as lacking certain ‘essential’ abilities or labelled as exhibiting ‘as negative seen abilities’; (b) the impact assessment of different forms of ableism onto different ethics theories and ethical principles including health ethics theories and their use to govern science and technology and health research, care and policy and (c) identification of ethical actions that flow from a favouritism for certain abilities [16].

A definition in a 2009 paper of mine “Ableism ethics: we need participatory discussions on values and ethics in relation to our bodies and abilities, to favouritism for certain abilities, and to reactions towards humans and other biological entities that are seen to lack essential abilities, whether these are real or perceived. [15].

Ability Security        

means that one is able to live a decent life with whatever set of abilities one has, and that one will not be forced to have a prescribed set of abilities to live a secure life [3].

“Ability minority”: Once ability is in the minority. This can lead to disablism, ability security Insecurity, ability identity Insecurity and other negative ability based dynamics

Ability identity security / Ability identity Abuse

is the security to be at able to be at ease with ones abilities [3] Or in abuse and violence language one is free of being identity abused based on one’s abilities (ability identity abuse).

Ability identity abuse is that others negate ability identity security, the ability that one is at ease with one’s abilities which includes that one can build an identity around ones set of abilities.

Ability Identity Self Determination Security

That one has the power to define ones ability identity

Governance of ability expectations / Ability expectation Governance

is about how we govern ability expectations and ableism, the favouritism for certain abilities and the reaction towards non favoured abilities. A definition from me from 2009 “Ableism governance: we need frameworks, standards and practices for the governance of ableism – that is, how to handle the favouritism for certain abilities and the reaction towards non-favoured abilities” [15] see also [16].  “Ability expectation governance” focuses on how to navigate the societal aspects of ability expectations. see here.

Ability expectation literacy

means people understand the consequences of ability expectations see here.

Ability discrimination

meaning that one is oppressed because their ability is different see here.

Ability expectation oppression

Being oppressed by ability expectations of others [11] see linkage to colonial theory [11] see also here and here

Ability expectation and ableism apartheid 

individuals or social structures deprive other individuals or social structures of a decent life based on the disabling use of ability expectation and ableism (see  also concept of ability security and ability identity security). For example the term ability expectation apartheid was used explicitly and covered by a paper I did together with the great scholar Anita Ghai.  [11]  How our paper was interpreted: “Wolbring and Ghai discuss how new technologies of enhancement are generating both new categorisations and new life forms. They end up drawing on Foucault’s (1976) analysis of biopower to argue that ‘ability expectation apartheid is one form of social apartheid’”

My group also linked ability expectation to certain forms of apartheid (one can say have their roots in ability expectation and ableism used in a disabling way)  here, here , and here from me) (all linked to adaptation apartheid),  and here  (linked to occupational apartheid). For description of the term “occupational apartheid” see  here (Wikipedia)   here (OT textbook) (and open access here  and here ) and “adaptation apartheid”  (page 166  original quote from Desmond Tutu in “We do not need climate change apartheid in adaptation https://hdr.undp.org/system/files/documents//human-development-report-20072008-english.2008-english“

Ability-expectation creep

meaning that we seem to constantly expect more abilities see [7] here also here.

Ability obsolescence

ones abilities are obsolete; see for a piece that used the term obsolescence (for the first time in conjunction with enhancement) here [18].

Ability Consumerism

Abilities are a focus of consumerism, of something one can consume (for a piece that used consumerism in conjunction with enhancement see here [18].

Ability Commodification

Ability expectations and ableism are commodified; for a piece that looked at commodification in conjunction with enhancement see here [18] but also the Denton/ Alex D quote from the Computer game Deus Ex, Invisible War from 2003 here .

Ability expectation (Ableism) Foresight

To anticipate and understand shifting social dynamics enabled by advancing sciences and technologies [15]. A 2009 definition from me “Ableism foresight: we need to anticipate and understand shifting social dynamics enabled by advancing sciences and technologies and other developments that lead to a change in ableism and what abilities are favoured” [15] see also [16].

Ability Privilege

Ability privilege describes the unreasonable advantages enjoyed by those who exhibit certain abilities (often without being aware of it/realizing it as these ability privileges are taken for granted without thinking about it). To link it back to disabled people as the originator of the term ableism. The concept of ableism was developed to question the ability privileges (i.e. ability to work, to gain education, to be part of society, to have an identity, to be seen as citizen) that come with a species-typical body (although they did not use the term ability privilege)[5] (just my paper in here). Disablism conceptualized within this meaning of ability privilege suggests that people with expected, irrelevant normative body abilities are not willing to give up their ability privileges [5] (just my paper from [5] here). The ability privilege is often evident in the use of other terms such as accommodation where something the ability privilege group needs accommodation wise is seen as their due (e.g. washrooms) and as such its not listed as an accommodation whereas other are seem as being ‘accommodated (e.g. wheelchair washroom). The cultural phenomenon of Ability privileges, however, can be employed beyond the social group of disabled people and their encounter with the ‘ability normative’ body linked to disabled people.

Ability privileges can play themselves out between traditionally defined social groups (e.g. race, gender, class). Social groups are also formed based on ability privileges whereby the social group is defined by whether its members have or don’t have a given ability (the ability-have and the ability-non-have social groups). Ability privilege  also influences how one relates to nature and to animals and shapes one identity [5]  (only my paper from [5] here).

Ability Inequity and inequality from [3]

 For both, ability inequity and ability inequality two subgroups exist. One group is linked to intrinsic bodily abilities and the other group is linked to external abilities, abilities generated by human interventions that impact humans. These two subgroups of internal and external ability inequities and inequality are quite distinct in their effects and discourse dynamics, involved stakeholders and goals.

Definition: Ability inequality is a descriptive term denoting any uneven distribution of access to and protection from abilities generated through human interventions, right or wrong

Example: Lack of access to education employment….  Ability inequalities also are experienced by so called body normative people. Eating certain food leads to better abilities, but not everyone has access to this food. Clean water leads to better abilities, but not everyone has access to it.

Definition: Ability inequality is a descriptive term denoting any uneven judgment of abilities intrinsic to biological structures such as the human body, right or wrong

Example: Negative judgments of people who ‘lack’ certain ‘normative’ intrinsic set of body related abilities as defective (e.g. not hearing as impairment person versus ability diverse person), at the same time people do not define themselves as defective because they cannot fly; or less payment for the same amount of work for women versus men….

Definition: Ability inequity is a normative term denoting an unjust or unfair distribution of access to and protection from abilities generated through human interventions

Example: One could say that one of the purposes of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities  was to highlight which ability inequities are unjust and to prescribe some remedies for them

Definition: Ability inequity is a normative term denoting an unjust or unfair judgment of abilities intrinsic to biological structures such as the human body

Negative judgment linked to the abilities or perceived lack thereof of disabled people or women are judged unfairly with their abilities in work payments.

References cited in text above

[1] Wolbring, G., Why NBIC?  Why Human Performance Enhancement? Innovation; The European Journal of Social Science Research 2008, 21 (1), 25-40

[2] Wolbring, G., Ecohealth through an ability studies and disability studies lens In Ecological Health: Society, Ecology and Health, Gislason, M. K., Ed. Emerald: London, UK, 2013; Vol. 15, pp 91-107

[3] Wolbring, G., Ableism and Favoritism for Abilities Governance, Ethics and Studies: New Tools for Nanoscale and Nanoscale enabled Science and Technology Governance. In The Yearbook of Nanotechnology in Society, vol. II: The Challenges of Equity and Equality, Cozzens, S.; M.Wetmore, J., Eds. Springer: New York, 2010; pp 89-104.

[4]  Wolbring, G., The Politics of Ableism. Development 2008, 51 (2), 252-258.

[5] Wolbring, G., Ability Privilege: A Needed Addition to Privilege Studies. Journal for Critical Animal Studies 2014, 13 (2). P.118-141  see http://www.criticalanimalstudies.org/volume12-issue-2-2014/

[6] Wolbring, G., Eco-ableism. Anthropology News 2012, Sept. 14. https://svara98.typepad.com/blog/2012/09/eco-ableism-anthropology-news.html

[7] Wolbring, G., & Yumakulov, S. (2015). Education through an Ability Studies Lens.

Zeitschrift für Inklusion, 10(2), no page number. Retrieved from: http://www.inklusion

online.net/index.php/inklusion-online/article/view/278/261

[8] Wolbring, G., Ethical Theories and Discourses through an Ability Expectations and Ableism Lens: The Case of Enhancement and Global Regulation. Asian Bioethics Review 2012, 4 (4), 293-309

[9] Wolbring, G., & Diep, L. (2016). Cognitive/Neuroenhancement through an Ability Studies lens. In F. Jotterand & V. Dubljevic (Eds.), Cognitive Enhancement (pp. 57-75). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press

[10] Wolbring, G (2015) Human Enhancement verlangt die Auseinandersetzung mit Fähigkeitserwartungen in special issue “Schwerpunkt// Der optimierte Mensch in «Soziale Sicherheit CHSS» Social Security, Journal of the Federal Social Insurance Office, Switzerland Vol 16, Issue 1, p 16-19  http://www.bsv.admin.ch/dokumentation/publikationen/00096/03361/03362/index.html?lang=de The French version of full journal issue is  http://www.bsv.admin.ch/dokumentation/publikationen/00096/03361/03362/index.html?lang=fr  The English version Human Enhancement: The need for Ability Expectation Governance available upon request

[11] Wolbring, G., & Ghai, A. (2015). Interrogating the impact of scientific and technological development on disabled children in India and beyond. Disability and the Global South, 2(2), 667-685.

[12] Wolbring, G.; Burke, B., (2013) Reflecting on Education for Sustainable Development through Two Lenses: Ability Studies and Disability Studies. Sustainability 2013, 5 (6), 2327-2342.

[13] Wolbring, Gregor (2012) Citizenship Education through an Ability Expectation and “Ableism” Lens: The Challenge of Science and Technology and Disabled People in Educ. Sci. 2012, 2(3), 150-164;

[14] Wolbring G. and Lisitza A. (2017) Justice Among Humans, Animals and the Environment: Investigated Through an Ability Studies, Eco-Ableism, and Eco-Ability Lens in Weaving Nature, Animals and Disability for Eco-ability: The Intersectionality of Critical Animal, Disability and Environmental Studies, editors Anthony J. Nocella II, Amber E. George, JL Schatz, Lexington Books, p 41-62

[15] Wolbring, G. (2009). What next for the human species? Human performance enhancement, ableism and pluralism. Development Dialogue, 2, 141-161

[16] Wolbring, G. (2010). Human Enhancement Through the Ableism Lens. Dilemata, 2(3), 1-13. https://www.dilemata.net/revista/index.php/dilemata/article/view/31/42

[17]Wolbring Gregor (2019) Ability expectation and ableism governance: An essential aspect of a culture of peace   in the book “Legacies of Love, Peace and Hope: How Education can overcome Hatred and Divide” Editor Darryl R.J. Macer, Eubios Ethics Institute (Christchurch Tsukuba Science City Bangkok), pp.116-126.

[18] Wolbring, G., Obsolescence and body technologies Obsolescencia y tecnologías del cuerpo. Dilemata International Journal of Applied Ethics 2010, 2 (4), 67-83

[19] Miller, P., Parker, S., & Gillinson, S. (2004) Disablism How to tackle the last prejudice. Retrieved September 12, 2018, from  http://www.demos.co.uk/files/disablism.pdf

[20] Wolbring Gregor and Gill Simerta (2023) Potential Impact of Environmental Activism: A Survey and a Scoping Review in Sustainability 2023, 15(4), 2962; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15042962

[21](Wolbring, G. (2006). The unenhanced underclass. In J. M. Wilsdon, P (Ed.), Better Humans? The politics of human enhancement (pp. 122-129). Demos Institute. http://www.demos.co.uk/projects/currentprojects/betterhumans/

[22] Wolbring, G. (2008a). Ableism, Enhancement Medicine and the techno poor disabled. In P. Healey & S. Rayner (Eds.), Unnatural Selection: The Challenges of Engineering Tomorrow’s People (pp. 196-208). Earthscan.)

All our work using Ableism as a lens

1. Wolbring Gregor and Gill Simerta (2023) Occupational Concepts: An Underutilized Resource to Further Disabled People and Others Being Occupied: A Scoping Review in Societies 2023, 13(12), 259; https://doi.org/10.3390/soc13120259Wolbring, G., & Lillywhite, A. (2023).Coverage of Allies, Allyship and Disabled People: A Scoping Review Societies, 13(11), 241; https://doi.org/10.3390/soc13110241
2. Wolbring Gregor and Gill Simerta (2023) Potential Impact of Environmental Activism: A Survey and a Scoping Review in Sustainability 2023, 15(4), 2962; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15042962
3. Lillywhite Brielle and Wolbring Gregor (2023) Auditing the impact of artificial intelligence on the ability to have a good life: Using well-being measures as a tool to investigate the views of undergraduate STEM students“, in OPEN FORUM SECTION of AI & Society: Knowledge, Culture and Communication online first (not open access) 10.1007/s00146-022-01618-5
4. Lillywhite, Brielle and Wolbring, Gregor (2023 HAVING THE ABILITY TO HAVE A GOOD LIFE: What might be the impact of BCIs? in “Policy, Identity, and Neurotechnology: The Neuroethics of Brain-Computer Interfaces”, editors Veljko Dubljevic and Allen Coin Springer p 117-150 DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-26801-4_8
5. Wolbring Gregor, Lillywhite Aspen (2023) Burnout through the Lenses of Equity/Equality, Diversity and Inclusion and Disabled People: A Scoping Review Societies 2023, 13(5), 131; https://doi.org/10.3390/soc13050131
6. Arora, Khushi, Wolbring Gregor (2022) Kinesiology, Physical Activity, Physical Education, and Sports through an Equity/Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) Lens: A Scoping Review in sports 10(4) 55  https://doi.org/10.3390/sports10040055
7. Salvatore, Chiara and Wolbring Gregor (2021) Children and Youth Environmental Action: The Case of Children and Youth with Disabilities in Sustainability  13(17), 9950 DOI: 10.3390/su13179950.
8. Wolbring, Gregor (2021) Cherry-picking and demonizing abilities in Zeitschrift für Disability Studies (ZDS), inaugural issue. PDF DOI 10.15203/ZDS_2021_1.05
9. Wolbring, Gregor and Lillywhite Aspen (2021) Equity/Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) in Universities: The Case of Disabled People in Societies, 11(2), 49; https://doi.org/10.3390/soc11020049
10. Wolbring Gregor (2020) Violence and Abuse through an Ability Studies lens in Indian Journal of Critical Disability Studies 1(1): 41-67
11. Kögel, Johannes and Wolbring Gregor (2020) What it takes to be a pioneer: Ability expectations from brain-computer interface users in Nanoethics online first https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-020-00378-0
12. Wolbring Gregor,  Deloria Rochelle, Lillywhite Aspen, Villamil Valentina (2020) “Ability Expectation and Ableism Peace,” in Peace Review, Issue 31(4): Disability and Peace, with Guest Editor Emily Nusbaum.
13. Djebrouni, Manel and Wolbring, Gregor  (2020) Impact of robotics and human enhancement on occupation: what does it mean for rehabilitation? in Disability and Rehabilitation 42 (11), 1518-1528
14. Wolbring Gregor (2019) Ability expectation and ableism governance: An essential aspect of a culture of peace   in the book “Legacies of Love, Peace and Hope: How Education can overcome Hatred and Divide” Editor Darryl R.J. Macer, Eubios Ethics Institute (Christchurch Tsukuba Science City Bangkok), pp.116-126. just my piece here
15. Hoffmann, T. & Wolbring, G. (2019): Zwischen Superkrüppel und Cybathlon: Behinderung und Spitzensport in den Medien. In: Vierteljahresschrift für Heilpädagogik und ihre Nachbargebiete (VHN), 88(4), p. 321-324
16. Wolbring, Gregor and Djebrouni, Manel (2018)  Motivated Reasoning and Disabled People in Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Equality and Diversity Volume 4 Issue 2 no page number
17. Wolbring, G. and Martin B. (2018)   Analysis of the Coverage of Paratriathlon and Paratriathletes in Canadian Newspapers  Sports 2018, 6(3), Article 87
18. Wolbring, G. (2018) Eltern ohne Vorurteile: in Empowerment und Exklusion: Zur Kritik der Mechanismen gesellschaftlicher Ausgrenzung  Editors Thomas Hoffmann, Wolfgang Jantzen and Ursula Stinkes; Psychosozial-Verlag, Giessen. p. 393-397   
19. Wolbring, G and Diep, L (2018) Antizipatorische Governance bedarf antizipatorischer Interessenvertretung: Der Fall der Governance von Fähigkeitserwartungen: in Empowerment und Exklusion: Zur Kritik der Mechanismen gesellschaftlicher Ausgrenzung  Editors Thomas Hoffmann, Wolfgang Jantzen and Ursula Stinkes; Psychosozial-Verlag, Giessen, p. 345-373
20. Wolbring G. (2018) Prostheses and Other Equipment: The Issue of the Cyborg Athlete—Interrogating the Media Coverage of the Cybathlon 2016 Event. In: Brittain I., Beacom A. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Paralympic Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, London, p 439-459  link
21. Wolbring G., (2017) Teaching About Ability expectation and its governance: the issue of STEM in Education and New Technologies Perils and Promises for Learners Edited by Kieron Sheehy, Andrew Holliman Routledge p.121-140
22. Wolbring, G. (2017)  The gift of belonging: From parents to society . In K. Scorgie, & D. Sobsey, (Eds.) Working with Families for Inclusive Education: Navigating Identity, Opportunity and Belonging Vol. 10 in C, Fortin (series editor) International Perspectives on Inclusive Education.  San Diego, CA: Emerald p. 63-70
23. Wolbring G. and Lisitza A. (2017) Justice Among Humans, Animals and the Environment: Investigated Through an Ability Studies, Eco-Ableism, and Eco-Ability Lens in Weaving Nature, Animals and Disability for Eco-ability: The Intersectionality of Critical Animal, Disability and Environmental Studies,
    editors Anthony J. Nocella II, Amber E. George, JL Schatz, Lexington Books
    p41-62
24. Wolbring, Gregor (2017)  Why “ability expectations” must be central to debates on science and our future The Conversation, Canada
25. Wolbring, Gregor (2017)  Why “ability expectations” must be central to debates on science and our future reprint in National Post, Canada
26. Wolbring, G. and Ghai, A. (2016) Interrogating the impact of scientific and technological development on disabled children in India and beyond. In Danforth, S. and Gabel, S. L. (Eds.) Vital Questions Facing Disability Studies in Education, 2nd edition (pp. 249-268). New York: Peter Lang. reprint of an article published first in Disability and the Global South 2(2) pp. 667-685
27. Wolbring Gregor and Chai Tsing-Yee (Emily) (2016) Investigating Occupational Therapy: from Disability Studies to Ability Studies Chapter 23, pp 211-219 in Occupational Therapy without Borders new edition for 2016: Editors Nick Pollard and Dikaios Sakellariou, Elsevier Publisher preproof version online with permission of publisher here
28. Wolbring, G.; Diep, L.(2016) The Discussions around Precision Genetic Engineering: Role of and Impact on Disabled People Laws, 5(3), 37; doi: 10.3390/laws5030037 for metrics
29.  Wolbring, G.; Diep, L. Cognitive/Neuroenhancement through an ability studies lens. In Cognitive enhancement, Jotterand, F.; Dubljevic, V., Eds. Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2016; pp 57-75
30. Wolbring, Gregor (2015) Gene editing: Govern ability expectations Nature, 527(7579), 446-446. doi: 10.1038/527446b
31. Diep, Lucy; Cabibihan John-John and Wolbring Gregor (2015)  Social Robots: Views of special education teachers p 160-164 in Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on ICTs for improving Patients Rehabilitati on Research Techniques 01st-02nd of October 2015 University Lusófona de Humanidades e Tecnologías Lisbon, Portugal Editors: Habib M. Fardoun, Pedro Gamito, Víctor M. R. Penichet, Daniyal M. Alghazzawi
32. Diep Lucy and Wolbring Gregor (2015) “Perceptions of Brain-Machine Interface Technology among Mothers of Disabled Children“. in Disability Studies Quarterly, Volume 35/4 December 16,
33. Wolbring, G (2015) (link to German Version of the full issueHuman Enhancement verlangt die Auseinandersetzung mit Fähigkeitserwartungen in special issue “Schwerpunkt// Der optimierte Mensch in «Soziale Sicherheit CHSS» Social Security, Journal of the Federal Social Insurance Office, Switzerland Vol 16, Issue 1, p 16-19 The French version of full journal issue is here The English version Human Enhancement: The need for Ability Expectation Governance available upon request
34. Wolbring G and Ghai Anita (2015) Interrogating the impact of scientific and technological development on disabled children in India and beyond in Disability and the Global South 2(2) pp. 667-685
35. Wolbring G and Yumakulov S (2015) Education through an Ability Studies Lensin Zeitschrift für Inklusion 10(2) no page number Special Issue on Ableism: Behinderung und Befähigung im Bildungswesen Editor Lisa Pfahl and Tobias Buchner link to full issue
36. Wolbring Gregor (2014) Ability Privilege: A needed addition to privilege studies:In Journal for Critical Animal Studies  Vol. 12, No. 2, p.118-141
37. Ball, Natalie and Wolbring Gregor (2014) “Cognitive Enhancement: Perceptions among parents of children with disabilities” In: NeuroethicsPublished online February 21,
38. Billawala, Alshaba and Wolbring Gregor (2014) “Analyzing the discourse surrounding Autism in the New York Times using an ableism lens”.In Disability Studies Quarterly Vol 34(1), no page number
39. Wolbring, G., Hearing Beyond the Normal Enabled by Therapeutic Devices: The Role of the Recipient and the Hearing Profession. Neuroethics 2013, 6 (3), 607-616.
40. Tynedal, J.; Wolbring, G., Paralympics and Its Athletes Through the Lens of the New York Times. Sports 2013, 1 (1), 13-36.
41. Diep, L.; Wolbring, G., Who Needs to Fit in? Who Gets to Stand out? Communication Technologies Including Brain-Machine Interfaces Revealed from the Perspectives of Special Education School Teachers Through an Ableism Lens. Education Sciences 2013, 3 (1), 30-49.
42. Wolbring, G.; Leopatra, V., Sensors: Views of Staff of a Disability Service Organization. Journal of Personalized Medicine 2013, 3 (1), 23-39.
43. Wolbring, G.; Burke, B., Reflecting on Education for Sustainable Development through Two Lenses: Ability Studies and Disability Studies. Sustainability 2013, 5 (6), 2327-2342.
44. Wolbring, G.; Diep, L.; Yumakulov, S.; Ball, N.; Yergens, D., Social Robots, Brain Machine Interfaces and Neuro/Cognitive Enhancers: Three Emerging Science and Technology Products through the Lens of Technology Acceptance Theories, Models and Frameworks. Technologies 2013, 1 (1), 3-25.
45. Wolbring, G., Ecohealth through an ability studies and disability studies lens In Ecological Health: Society, Ecology and Health, Gislason, M. K., Ed. Emerald: London, UK, 2013; Vol. 15, pp 91-107.
46. Wolbring, G.; Diep, L.; Yumakulov, S.; Ball, N.; Leopatra, V.; Yergens, D., Emerging Therapeutic Enhancement Enabling Health Technologies and Their Discourses: What Is Discussed within the Health Domain? Healthcare 2013, 1 (1), 20-52.
47. Noga, J.; Wolbring, G., An Analysis of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio +20) Discourse Using an Ability Expectation Lens. Sustainability 2013, 5 (9), 3615-3639.
48. Wolbring, G.; Mackay, R.; Rybchinski, T.; Noga, J., Disabled People and the Post-2015 Development Goal Agenda through a Disability Studies Lens Sustainability 2013, 5 (10), 4152-4182.
49. Wolbring, G., ‘Culture of Peace’ from an Ability and Disability Studies Lens. In Expanding Peace Ecology: Peace, Security, Sustainability, Equity and Gender; Perspectives of IPRA’s Ecology and Peace Commission, Oswald Spring, U.; Brauch, H.-G.; Tidball, K., Eds. Springer: New York, 2013; Vol. 12, p 193.
50. Wolbring, G.; Rybchinski, T., Social Sustainability and Its Indicators through a Disability Studies and an Ability Studies Lens. Sustainability 2013, 5 (11), 4889-4907.
51. Hutcheon, E.; Wolbring, G., Deconstructing the Resilience Concept Using an Ableism Lens: Implications for People with Diverse Abilities. Dilemata 2013, (11), 235-252.
52. Ball, N.; Wolbring, G., Portrayals of and Arguments around different Eugenic Practices: Past and Present. International Journal of Disability, Community & Rehabilitation 2013, 12 (2), Article 2.
53. Hutcheon, E.; Wolbring, G., “Cripping” Resilience: Contributions from Disability Studies to Resilience Theory. M/C Journal 2013, 16 (5).
54. Wolbring, G., Therapeutic bodily assistive devices and paralympic athlete expectations in winter sport. Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine 2012, 22 (1), 51-57.
55. Wolbring, G., Therapeutic Enhancements and the view of Rehabilitation Educators. Dilemata International Journal of Applied Ethics 2012, (8), 169-183.
56. Wolbring, G., Paralympians outperforming Olympians: An increasing challenge for Olymp-ism and the Paralympic and Olympic movement. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 2012.
57. Hutcheon, E. J.; Wolbring, G., Voices of disabled post secondary students: Examining higher education “disability” policy using an ableism lens. 2012.
58. Wolbring, G., Expanding Ableism: Taking down the Ghettoization of Impact of Disability Studies Scholars. Societies 2012, 2 (3), 75-83.
59. Wolbring, G.; Ball, N., Nanoscale Science and Technology and People with Disabilities in Asia: An Ability Expectation Analysis. NanoEthics 2012, 6 (2), 127-135.
60. Wolbring, G., Eco-ableism. Anthropology News 2012, Sept. 14.
61. Wolbring, G., Citizenship Education through an Ability Expectation and “Ableism” Lens: The Challenge of Science and Technology and Disabled People. Education Sciences 2012, 2 (3), 150-164.
62. Wolbring, G., Nanotechnology for Democracy versus Democratization of Nanotechnology. In Little by Little: Expansions of Nanoscience and Emerging Technologies, Lente, H. v.; Coenen, C.; Fleischer, T.; Konrad, K.; Krabbenborg, L.; Milburn, C.; Thoreau, F., Eds. AKA-Verlag/IOS Press: Dordrecht, 2012.
63. Yumakulov, S.; Yergens, D.; Wolbring, G., Imagery of people with disabilities within social robotics research. Proc.ICSR, LNAI 2012, 7621, 168-177.
64. Wolbring, G., Ethical Theories and Discourses through an Ability Expectations and Ableism Lens: The Case of Enhancement and Global Regulation. Asian Bioethics Review 2012, 4 (4), 293-309.
65. Wolbring, G., Ableism and energy security and insecurity:. Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 2011, 5 (1), Article 3.
66. Wolbring, G., People with disabilities and social determinants of health discourses. Canadian Journal of Public Health. 2011, 102 (4), 317.
67. Wolbring, G., Nanotechnology and the Transhumanization of Health, Medicine, and Rehabilitation. Lee Kleinmann, D.; Delborne, J.; Cloud-Hansen, K.; Handelsman, J., Eds. Mary Ann Liebert: New Rochelle, NY, 2010; pp 290-303.
68. Wolbring, G., Ableism and Favoritism for Abilities Governance, Ethics and Studies: New Tools for Nanoscale and Nanoscale enabled Science and Technology Governance. In The Yearbook of Nanotechnology in Society, vol. II: The Challenges of Equity and Equality, Cozzens, S.; M.Wetmore, J., Eds. Springer: New York, 2010; pp 89-104.
69. Wolbring, G., Obsolescence and body technologies Obsolescencia y tecnologías del cuerpo. Dilemata International Journal of Applied Ethics 2010, 2 (4), 67-83.
70. Burke, B.; Wolbring, G., Beyond Education for All: Using ableism studies lens and the BIAS FREE framework. Development (Rome) 2010, 53 (4), 535-539.
71. Coenen, C.; Schuijff, M.; Smits, M.; Klaassen, P.; Hennen, L.; Rader, M.; Wolbring, G. Human Enhancement Study; (IP/A/STOA/FWC/2005-28/SC35, 41 & 45) PE 417.483; 2009, 2009.http://www.europarl.europa.eu/stoa/publications/studies/stoa2007-13_en.pdf
72. Wolbring, G., Bionics, ‘therapeutic’ enhancement, the UN Convention on the rights off persons with disabilities and the way ahead. Journal of International Biotechnology Law 2009, 6 (5), 193-206.
73. Wolbring, G., A Culture of Neglect: Climate Discourse and Disabled People. Journal Media and Culture 2009, 12 (4).
74. Wolbring, G., Why NBIC? Why Human Performance Enhancement? Innovation; The European Journal of Social Science Research 2008, 21 (1), 25-40.
75. Wolbring, G., Oscar Pistorius and the Future Nature of Olympic, Paralympic and Other Sports. SCRIPTed – A Journal of Law, Technology & Society 2008, 5 (1), 139-160.
76. Wolbring, G., The Politics of Ableism. Development 2008, 51 (2), 252-258.
77. Wolbring, G., “Is there an end to out-able? Is there an end to the rat race for abilities?”. Journal: Media and Culture 2008, 11 (3).
78. Wolbring, G., (2008) Ableism, Enhancement Medicine and the techno poor disabled. In Unnatural Selection: The Challenges of Engineering Tomorrow’s People, Healey, P.; Rayner, S., Eds. Earthscan: 2008.
79. Wolbring, G., (2008) One World, One Olympics: Governing Human Ability, Ableism and Disablism in an Era of Bodily Enhancements. In Human Futures: Art in the Age of Uncertainty, Miah, A., Ed. Liverpool University Press: Liverpool, 2008.
80. Wolbring, G., A Disability Rights Approach Towards Sex Selection. Development 2006, 48 (4).
81. Wolbring, G., (2006) The unenhanced underclass. In Better Humans? The politics of human enhancement, Wilsdon, J. M., P, Ed. Demos Institute: 2006.
82. Wolbring, G. (2005) HTA Initiative #23 The triangle of enhancement medicine, disabled people, and the concept of health: a new challenge for HTA, health research, and health policy; Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research (AHFMR): Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research (AHFMR) webpage, 2005, 2005.http://www.ihe.ca/documents/HTA-FR23.pdf