Medical education is an evolving process that continues to incorporate various modes of delivery to enrich medical students’ learning. Film is a unique medium that has been shown to be an effective teaching method in educating students about patient socioeconomic factors and clinical interactions. Although film is established as an effective teaching tool, there is little to no data regarding film’s effectiveness in improving medical students’ awareness and understanding of governmental healthcare policies. The aim of this study was to determine if medical students’ understanding of disability healthcare policy was significantly influenced after viewing the film Crip Camp. Medical students watched the film Crip Camp and engaged in peer-facilitated discussion of the film. Prior to the screening, participants completed a Likert scale and yes/no survey questionnaire to assess their baseline awareness of disability policy. Following the screening, students completed the survey again. The pre- and post-survey groups were compared for statistical significance using the Mann-Whitney U test. Furthermore, a One-Way Chi-Square analysis test was conducted. In total, 18 participants responded to the surveys given at the film screening. There was a statistically significant difference between pre- and post-survey answers regarding Question 1: “Do you think that the government is doing enough in 2024 to provide services for individuals with disabilities?”(U = 420, z = 8.81, p < 0.01). Furthermore, most students who answered “Mostly not” to the previous question, also indicated “Yes” regarding Question 2: “Do you think that the state of Michigan should establish opt-in in-patient facilities for those with severe disabilities?” (ꭓ² = 5.0294, df = 2, a = 0.05). The data suggests that there was a significant difference in participants’ understanding of disability healthcare policy after viewing Crip Camp. The number of students that answered “I don’t know” to Question 1 decreased from 8 to 3. Thus, it can be inferred that the film influenced the students’ understanding because they took a stance on Question 1 post-screening. Following the screening, significantly more students selected “Mostly not” for Question 1 and “Yes” for Question 2. Hence, it can be inferred that the students became more inclined to support the government establishing opt-in services for individuals with disabilities. The scope of future studies could aim to assess students’ knowledge on health policy, and whether our screenings impact their future approach to care.