ABSTRACT
Introduction Law impacts significantly on disabled people. Furthermore there is an intrinsic connection between law and societal values so when a particular set of values or conceptual model is enshrined in law, its coercive effect may stigmatise disabled people. It is important, therefore, to explore the ways in which lawmakers frame disability issues. This chapter aims to explore the relationship between how ‘disability’ is perceived in the United Kingdom (UK) and the laws resulting from those attitudes. Two key UK lawmakers are the legislature (parliament) and the judiciary (courts) (Holland and Webb 2006). Laws stemming from parliament take the form of statutes and regulations;1 laws are made by courts through the reasoning adopted in cases (Holland and Webb 2006).2 This chapter focuses on judge-made law (case law) in the context of what have become known as ‘end-oflife’ cases. It concentrates on three recent, controversial disputes that have been played out before the courts in England and Wales.3 Through analysing the discourses employed by judges in these cases, this chapter seeks to demonstrate the almost imperceptible yet insidious impact of what may be called the ‘medical model’ of disability. Its profound and often detrimental influence stems, in part, from judges’ reliance on medical professionals as ‘experts’ in these cases.
