《身心障礙者權益保障法》第47條規定政府應制定提早退休政策，但勞保迄今卻沒有落實。本文從理念制度主義觀點，透過質化研究資料，探討相關決策討論過程。發現在高層次理念上，受訪障礙者、政府代表與學者專家對「平等」概念排序差異明顯；而在政策與工具理念層次，三方行動者對改革失能年金、強化職場支持與合理調整等政策工具呈現共識。但是政府與學界掌握制度性話語權，透過專業語言形塑理念正當性，導致理念競逐不僅發生於價值層次，也呈現在許多政策設計細節，藉由技術論述主導權重塑改革正當性，進而削弱障礙者對於制度創新的訴求。

Although the People with Disabilities Rights Protection Act stipulates the government’s responsibility to enact early retirement measures for people with disabilities, this policy remains unimplemented despite active civic group initiatives in Taiwan. Drawing on the ideational institutionalist perspective, we analyze the policymaking processes leading to this outcome. Based on the analysis of data from semi-structured interviews conducted with government officials, policy experts, and advocacy groups, significant divergences exist among the key actors regarding the definition of “equality” as a normative value. Furthermore, despite a consensus on invalidity pension reform, workplace support, and reasonable accommodation, government officials and policy experts gained the upper hand in the ideational contestation, reframing policy discourse to question the necessity of early retirement. Policy discussion has marginalized advocacy groups advocating for this policy, leading to the failure of policy implementation.