Response to Mark Kuczewski

members consider themselves arst of all scholars and contributors to disability studies. Some consider themselves arst of all advocates. Some members identify strongly with it, and others, though identiaed with it by others, prefer other forms of identiacation, such as, e.g. bioethicist (!) or philosopher. Like members of the bioethics community, the disability community draws on work from a wide variety of disciplines and aspires to a productive critique of a wide variety of institutions, from medicine to law to public policy. And like members of the bioethics community, members of the disability community hold starkly different views. Consider, for example, the difference within the bioethics community between Dan Callahan and Peggy Battin on physician-assisted suicide. The chasm between them is no smaller than the one between the person from Not-DeadYet who is outraged at physician-assisted suicide and whose words stand at the head of Kuczewski’s essay—and Drew Batavia, who theorizes about and lives with a disability and who wrote an amicus curiae brief to the Supreme Court on behalf of physician-assisted suicide. As those of us in the bioethics community continue to move forward in thinking about disability issues, we will do well to heed Kuczewski’s call to engage in dialogue with the disability community for the sake of improving public policy. We also will do well to remember how much work bioethicists have already undertaken in this area and—as Mark Kuczewski suggests—to remember how important it will be to qualify generalizations about “their” community and “ours.” References