Thanks for the thoughtful comments. I of course disagree that Katz is being misrepresented in my article, but that’s why I provided the link to her original essay, so that people can judge for themselves. While it is true that Katz does not directly accuse the researchers of audism, there is no other explanation for her even bringing in the term in the first place, unless she thinks that the medical model embeds an audistic attitude.

As for your take on the social model, I don’t think that’s very different from mine, perhaps I simply did not explain myself clearly. Either way, Katz thinks deafness is not a condition that requires a medical approach, but rather a social one. I think the two are not exclusive, and that deafness is a disability to be cured, if possible, and if the affected person so wishes.