As well as delineating the theoretical and disciplinary debates that have helped to shape this book’s intervention, the introduction also highlights the ways in which the book bears the imprint of a political and academic consciousness in the making. No longer comfortable with the labour of ‘passing as non-disabled’, my voice in this book instead foregrounds moments of ambivalence, mis-fitting (Garland-Thomson, 2011), and theoretical disjuncture, rather than concealing these. Indeed, as I argue in this introduction and throughout the book, in order to play fruitfully with the (dis)connections between what it means to exist and be formed as a psychosocial subject, and what it means to be represented as the subject of a social grouping, the foregrounding of the vulnerable self and its investments in the field of discovery is required as a kind of ethical ‘irritant’ that threatens to contaminate (liberate?) the methodology. Keeping these concerns in mind, the introduction asks: can we define ‘the disabled child’? What do we mean by ‘the child’? Is the child of this book ‘real’ or ‘figurative’ (see, Lesnik-Oberstein, 2011, 2008)? The introduction also maps key developments in disability studies, reflects on methodological considerations when working across disciplines, and explores the ethics of writing about personal experience.