ABSTRACT
Disabled service users have suffered from the failure of designers and commercial markets to deliver affordable, aesthetically pleasing mass produced non-stigmatizing “aids” and “adaptations for daily living” or what would better be called “products for everyday life ”. At present, barriers in commodities (places, products and processes) prevent people with impairments from accessing them through the “mainstream” market. Traditionally, there has been a sharp dichotomy between the ways in which “main-stream” innovation and “assistive” innovation have been funded. Dividing the home market into mainstream and assistive components has pernicious consequences for home users and providers alike. Disabled users will of course be the principle beneficiaries of the mainstreaming of inclusive design, but the general public, health and public services, manufacturers, housing developers and the rest of the private sector all stand to gain from the liberation and independence of disabled people brought about through good design.
