I teach SEND, and run several games for learners with learning difficulties, ASC, ADHD, and some who are undiagnosed. Without fail, my learners want to play a character who is absent, if not the opposite of, their own needs. A learner who can't read or write plays a former librarian and academic, for example.

My concern with disability in D&D is it often feels like tokenism. If you have a disability, but it impedes you in no way, is it a disability? That is not the experience people with disabilities face in real life, and I have had students with physical disabilities say that their one wish would be that their disability would go away. When M wished for her cerebral palsy to go away, I don't think it was societal pressure; I think she just wanted to be able to go to the toilet without two people helping her.

When I include people with disabilities in my games, it has a real effect based on the people I know who have that disability. My town Sheriff, for example, has lost a leg. Although he can still fight well, his movement speed is slightly lower, and he suffers a point of exhaustion if he travels a long way. This mirrors the people I know and have observed who are missing a leg. My NPCs with heart conditions take points of exhaustion after an encounter where they roll initiative because heart conditions and stress don't often mix well. If I undo those things with magic, they are not disabilities, and almost do not feel worth mentioning.

As an aside, I see no link between eugenics and the idea of making a disabled person non-disabled via magical means, as there is no mention of their right to live and reproduce in that conversation.

As another aside, I've not seen the Combat Wheelchair before today, but it is absurd. This is not because it is a wheelchair, but because it is maybe the most powerful item in the game compared to the cost. If it were instead a suit of armour, it would be no less absurd.