The Ontario Right to Read Inquiry and the Social Model of Disability

Recently, Christine Caughill published an article in the Canadian Journal of Disability Studies, critiquing the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) Report of the Right to Read Inquiry (herein referred to as “the report”), titled “Managing the problem of dyslexia: a review of the Ontario Human Rights Commission Report of the Right to Read Inquiry” (Caughill, 2024). As a scholar of health equity, literacy advocate, and mother of children with dyslexia, I read this article with interest and concern. Caughill (2024) argues that the report utilizes a medical model of disability, was conducted in response to a “science of reading movement” (Caughill 2024, p. 38), frames children with reading disabilities as “a problem to be solved” (Caughill, 2024, p. 40), and is ultimately, “dehumanizing” of individuals with reading disabilities (Caughill, 2024, p. 38). However, Caughill misinterpreted and decontextualized aspects of the report, and in the process failed to recognize that the report is largely based on a social model of disability. In doing so, Caughill reinforces circulating narratives of dyslexia and disability that are harmful.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Canadian Journal of Disability Studies
Published
2024-12-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.15353/cjds.v13i3.1171
Primary Topic
Disability Rights and Representation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Ontario Right to Read Inquiry and the Social Model of Disability

Natalie D. Riediger
Canadian Journal of Disability Studies
Disability Rights and Representation
article

The Ontario Right to Read Inquiry and the Social Model of Disability

Natalie D. Riediger
article en

Abstract

Recently, Christine Caughill published an article in the Canadian Journal of Disability Studies, critiquing the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) Report of the Right to Read Inquiry (herein referred to as “the report”), titled “Managing the problem of dyslexia: a review of the Ontario Human Rights Commission Report of the Right to Read Inquiry” (Caughill, 2024). As a scholar of health equity, literacy advocate, and mother of children with dyslexia, I read this article with interest and concern. Caughill (2024) argues that the report utilizes a medical model of disability, was conducted in response to a “science of reading movement” (Caughill 2024, p. 38), frames children with reading disabilities as “a problem to be solved” (Caughill, 2024, p. 40), and is ultimately, “dehumanizing” of individuals with reading disabilities (Caughill, 2024, p. 38). However, Caughill misinterpreted and decontextualized aspects of the report, and in the process failed to recognize that the report is largely based on a social model of disability. In doing so, Caughill reinforces circulating narratives of dyslexia and disability that are harmful.

Canadian Journal of Disability StudiesVol. 13(3)
University of Manitoba (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 65%
Disability Rights and Representation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.