Holistic Policymaking: “Neo‐Liberalism” as Illustrated by the Women's and Disability Rights Movements

Abstract

The past several decades have seen the rise of two movements, the disability rights movement and the women's movement, with parallel concerns, histories, organizational issues, and other attributes. This article examines the philosophies of the two movements and their significance for the policymaking process. For example, both have struggled with the issues of difference versus equality in determining public policy; both stress the importance of considering problems to reside not in personal characteristics but in interactions with the environment. The article traces these and other similarities in ways of looking at policy problems between the women's movement and the disability movement, examines how these similarities reveal a fundamentally different view of policymaking, compares this philosophy with basic tenets of the Clinton administration, as expressed by key policymakers, and discusses what policy would look like if these changes occurred.

Policy Coherence and Policy Domains

“…In contrast, many policy areas are marked by inconsistent policies and little commonality of goals. We have identified these criticisms in commentary about national policies for children (Meucci, 1997), the disabled (Watson, 1993), the environment (Nierenberg, 2001), energy (Bleakley & Latoff, 2004), families (Bogenschneider, 2000), immigration (Wells, 2004), rural areas (Bonnen, 1992), transportation (Dilger, 2003), urban housing (Koschinsky & Swanstrom, 2001), and women (Gelb & Palley, 1996). Clearly, policy coherence is a relative term for which there can be differing degrees of the attribute.…”

Self-Determination and Disability Rights

“…Interesting though it may be, the intent of this article is not to chart the courses of the disability and women's rights movements and draw parallels between them. Such an approach would only be duplicating the work of other scholars who have previously undertaken this task (Russo & Jansen, 1988;Watson, 1993). Although there are many similarities between these two movements that could be highlighted by using a historical scope of inquiry, it is extremely difficult to draw direct parallels given the unique political and social climate surrounding each of these movements.…”

“…Unlike most racial groups, the populations of women and individuals with disabilities cut across racial and cultural boundaries. This heterogeneity presents a significant challenge for unification and solidarity among these groupsa challenge that has not been as prevalent in race-based social movements (Watson, 1993).…”