The law's understanding of intellectual disability as a disability.

Ellis (2013) looked at how courts talk about intellectual disability.

The paper shows judges care more about what a person can do than the medical label they carry.

It is a think-piece, not a lab study, so no new data were collected.

Courts ask, "Can this person live alone, work, or make choices?"

They pay less attention to the IQ number or the name of the diagnosis.

This shift means your reports should list real-life skills and needed supports first.

Wehmeyer (2013) makes the same point about doctor manuals. Both papers say, "Talk about function, not just disorder."

Olley (2013) zooms in and tells us to give courts clear, measurable words.

Mukherjee et al. (2015) shows the idea is already law: the Supreme Court now tells states to use flexible, functional rules instead of strict IQ cutoffs.

Thurm et al. (2022) updates the word list so we know when to say condition, disorder, syndrome, or disease.

When you write an IEP, court report, or transition plan, lead with daily skills and support needs. Put the diagnosis second. Judges, teachers, and families then see the person, not just the label.