@article{Gould_2020, title={The Complicated but Plain Relationship of Intellectual Disability and Well-being}, volume={3}, url={https://cjb-rcb.ca/index.php/cjb-rcb/article/view/220}, DOI={10.7202/1068762ar}, abstractNote={<p>The common belief is that disability is bad for the person who is disabled, that it has a negative effect on well-being. Some disability rights activists and&nbsp;philosophers, however, assert that disability has little or no impact on how well a&nbsp;person’s life goes, that it is neutral with respect to flourishing. In recent articles&nbsp;Stephen Campbell and Joseph Stramondo, while rejecting both views, claim that&nbsp;we cannot make any broad generalizations about the effect of disability on well-being. Whether they are right about physical and sensory disabilities, I do not&nbsp;know, but I argue that they are wrong about intellectual disabilities (ID). A broad&nbsp;generalization about intellectual disabilities&nbsp;<em>is </em>justified: it always has a negative&nbsp;impact on quality of life, even though there is no single negative impact. The&nbsp;disadvantages of ID are&nbsp;<em>plain </em>(all ID is bad) but&nbsp;<em>complicated</em> (its badness depends&nbsp;on multidimensional influences including biological condition, social&nbsp;environment and personal temperament).</p&gt;}, number={1}, journal={Canadian Journal of Bioethics / Revue canadienne de bioéthique}, author={Gould, James}, year={2020}, month={Jul.}, pages={37-51} }