Good point, I agree. She wants to go kayaking..

So let's continue with your approach. She looks on the internet to find a kayaking club. She can do that because she can type and read and understand the words on the screen. Then she phones up the club and arranges a first lesson. Cool! Still no need for support.

Yep.

Under what circumstances might someone need support?

Do they need support?

Under what circumstances might someone need support? — bert1

Some people certainly do.

Yep.

Is there an argument here?

I'm not sure. We seem to broadly agree, but you said my thinking is medical model, and that I delimit people by saying they can't do things, and you seemed to suggest these were bad. Also, you're not answering my questions very often.

I'm interested in when you think someone needs support. I think it's when they can't do something that they want or need to do without that support. Which is a functional test and involves the word 'can't' which you seem to object to (although I have never met a disabled person who objects to the use of this word). So I'm interested in an alternative approach. It might help me a lot with my work if I've been getting this wrong.

you're not answering my questions very often. — bert1

Yeah, I am. Maybe not in the way you expected.

A person needs support to achieve some outcome if, as things stand, they are unable to achieve the goal on their own.

No "can't".

A person needs support to achieve some outcome if, as things stand, they are unable to achieve the goal on their own. — Banno

OK, we agree. I see no great difference between 'unable' and 'can't'.