Learning disability and the limits of liberal citizenship: interactional impediments to political empowerment.

Recent policy initiatives have moved decisively toward empowering learning disabled citizens, recognising ability over disability, and promoting people's political empowerment and voice in the design of public services. While laudable and encouraging, these initiatives raise an important question: to what extent can a group of service users, whose very entitlement to state-sponsored assistance is justified by putative intellectual impairment, be empowered according to an exclusively liberal model of citizenship that presumes and requires, as its very defining features, intellectual ability and independence? In this paper we consider this question by means of an ethnographic analysis of an innovative advocacy group: the Parliament for People with Learning Disabilities (PPLD). We first document both an institutional and an interactional preference for clients to speak actively for themselves. We then describe three types of interactional trouble that emerged in the PPLD as obstacles to realising this preference in practice and the strikingly similar remedies that were generated to overcome these troubles. We conclude by discussing the limits of an approach to empowering learning disabled individuals that is cast too exclusively in terms drawn from liberal models of citizenship that prioritise voice over care, security, and wellbeing.