Sunday, June 9, 2013

Disability In The News

After several months of scanning the news articles that come up daily on Google News using "disability" and "disabled" as topic filters, the overall impression I get is that at the moment, disability news coverage is about three things:
  • Government-funded disability programs either going broke soon or grinding to a halt.
  • People pretending to be disabled or otherwise stealing disability benefits or privileges.
  • Inspiring local stories about individual people with disabilities overcoming adversity.
It's not about accessibility, employment opportunities, or ongoing, persistent institutionalization ... except for occasional coverage of the absolute worst examples of institutional abuse.

Saturday, June 8, 2013

Probability For Dummies

Just a reminder in light of news about the latest random mass shooting

IF the majority of random mass shooters have mental health impairments, it doesn't at all mean that the majority of people with mental health impairments are potential random mass shooters.

I don't know whether most or even many mass shooters are mentally ill anyway, though that's the impression left by news coverage. It seems like something that can be measured and known for sure, but I'm not sure where to find that information. But if it IS true, it says very little of any use about people with mental illness in general. It might, however, suggest that better understanding mental illness might help us understand random mass shooters, which might help prevent these terrible incidents.

Friday, June 7, 2013

Disney Gets Tough

I'm glad to see that the worst problem in the world regarding people with disabilities is finally being dealt with:

Associated Press / Orange County Register - June 7, 2013

Look, I posted about this before, and I agree that its unethical for people with disabilities to use their disability status to usher other, non-disabled people to the front of lines. It's also unethical for tour guide companies that hire people with disabilities specifically because they can do this, and it's unethical an extra layer of disgusting for the families that pay big bucks for this "service". I just don't think it's the biggest scandal in the disability world, by a longshot.

Also, do people with disabilities really value going to the head of all the lines the lines due to their disability? It sounds like one of those "privileges" that non-disabled people like to hand out, while they skimp and fudge their way around true accessibility and equal opportunity. You need too much care so you have to live in a nursing home, but if you are fortunate enough to have a car, why you can park in handicapped spots!

On the other hand, I haven't been to Disney World in decades, and I understand those lines can be incredibly long, so maybe its a perk worth preserving.

"Push Girls" and "My Gimpy Life"

I've been watching two "TV" shows about wheelchair users that have a lot in common: "Push Girls" and "My Gimpy Life". Both take a little effort to find, Both are worth the effort.

"Push Girls" and "My Gimpy Life" are about young women who are wheelchair users, who became disabled at some point due to accident or illness. The women in both are quite beautiful in the conventional sense. They all live and in various ways struggle to work in Hollywood ... the city and the industry. In both shows the women handle their disabilities with grace, humor, and assertiveness, while acknowledging how physical barriers and prejudices crop up every day. "My Gimpy Life" is fictional, while "Push Girls" is a reality show. Yet, they both feel realistic, and both attempt to portray the realities of living in a wheelchair honestly.

One major difference between these shows is how they are made.

"Push Girls" is a reality series on the Sundance Channel. "My Gimpy Life" is a web series posted to YouTube. Although it is on a cable channel with relatively low viewership, "Push Girls" is a fully professional television show. "My Gimpy Life" is more like semi-pro. The actors and crew are all professionals, and the quality is quite high, but like many web series, it is self-produced without a studio or company behind it, financed by donations fans and through project funding sites like Kickstarter. By necessity, "My Gimpy Life" is also shorter. Episodes last around 8 minutes, while episodes of "Push Girls" are a full half hour in conventional TV format.

By the way, "My Gimpy Life" contains un-bleeped profanity. "Push Girls" is relatively free of it, not surprising for a mainstream, general-audience show. However, the swearing on "My Gimpy Life" adds authenticity, and its nothing like, say, "The Sopranos" or "Deadwood." Both shows talk fairly frankly but appropriately about sex.

The biggest difference between these shows is that "Push Girls" is a more or less "serious" show, which shows all facets of these women's lives, the good, bad, and ordinary, where "My Gimpy Life" is reality-based, but firmly a comedy. If that makes "Push Girls" sound more profound, I don't mean it to. Both shows are profound in their own ways.

I haven't drawn any other big conclusions about these shows, except that I want more of both.

"Push Girls" on the Sundance Channel

"Push Girls" on Netflix



"My Gimpy Life" on YouTube

Thursday, June 6, 2013

High Maintenance

There's no justification for ableism, just as there's no justification for any kind of prejudice. In my experience, though, when it comes to ableism, there are explanations. For example, thing … we are pretty "high maintenance".

"High maintenance" is an insult usually applied to individuals perceived by someone else as being picky, demanding, never satisfied with the standard, but always asking for a customized version of whatever is on offer. It's the person who always wants their salad dressing on the side, milk instead of cream in their tea, their bacon extra crispy in a restaurant. It's the person who always insists on taking extra time to get ready, is easily offended, or who must hear from you by phone or text at precise intervals. "High maintenance" tends to be applied disproportionately to women, (that's called "sexism"), even though the world is full of controlling guys who could just as easily be called "high maintenance" if we didn't already call them "abusive".

"High maintenance" begins with someone's collection of very specific, very uncommon needs, but it's really about how other people perceive the needs and react to them. Behind the phrase, I think, lies two assumptions: one, that there's something phony and attention-seeking about these needs, and two, that since the standards always seem to be shifting, we can never really satisfy the "high maintenance" person and might be better off steering clear of them entirely.

Well, people with disabilities have all kinds of "special needs" and requirements that other people very quickly find can be a pain to meet. We need buildings to be accessible, and since many still are not, that takes work and expense. Almost accessible isn't good enough, either; one step is as much of a barrier as a while staircase. Some of us need to use different modes of communication than most people, such as Sign Language, large print, or braille. Many of us need more time to complete assignments or tests in school, have lists as long as your arm of foods we can't eat, and may not even be able to sit in an ordinary chair when we visit your house or go with you to the movies. We have to plan ahead twice as much as others, and we have fewer alternatives to choose from when things dn't go right.

No matter how well prepared and independent we are, our needs are not just our own, they belong to everyone we come in contact with. From a purely technical standpoint, we are just more "high maintenance" than most non-disabled people.

Here's where there are two crucial differences though:

First, our "special needs" are real, iron-clad, entirely practical, and inescapable. We can't decide to not need them. We can't shrug them off just to make things easier on others. Often, the only way to do that is to stay home where presumably we've adapted our environment as fully as it can be. But if we want to live a life, we have to impose a bit on others, which means making a daily decision that it's okay to be a bit "high maintenance". So, if it sometimes seems like we don't care how much of a bother we are being, understand that it may be the only way we can deal with our situation without retreating into a cocoon.

Second, it may seem like nothing's ever right for us, but it just seems that way because the needs are unfamiliar to you and require more effort than you may be used to giving. The majority of us who are not truly "high maintenance" in the worst sense, (don't get me wrong, some of us are, we're human), will do our part to make our needs understood and as easily met as possible. Here's where the unique beauty of accessibility modifications comes in; the more accessible the world becomes, the less "high maintenance" we will be.

Finally, if our needs sometimes seem endless, ill-timed, and annoying to you, imagine how they feel for us. Though it's not a nice thing to do, you do have the option of walking away. We can't. So, sometimes, some days, we feel the need to shed the humble self-deprication, and embrace our inner divas ... to be "high maintenance", confidently and without apology.

Wednesday, June 5, 2013

Cast A Cripple Whydontcha?

Hollywood's Disabled Actors Protest NBC's 'Ironside' Casting - When Is It Their Turn?
Greg Gilman, The Wrap - May 20, 2013

Good question … why didn't NBC cast the new "Ironside" with an actor who actually uses a wheelchair?

The most likely answer is a combination of two factors: 1) Blair Underwood was already under contract to star in a series to be specified, and 2) NBC feels they need a recognizable "star" to promote the re-imagining of a famous, but maybe only second-tier famous, series of the past. These are good reasons.

On the other hand, my sense is that new TV series with big name stars don't necessarily do better than series anchored by relatively unknown actors. In fact, it seems more like a sign of lack of confidence in the series itself … as if it can't stand on its own quality and needs a star to make it viable. And the fact remains that there are good actors out there who have disabilities, who could bring an extra dose of authenticity to a role like Chief Ironside, in which the main feature that distinguishes him from your run-of-the-mill police procedural sleuth is the disability. I like that that the new Ironside will be African-American, but it might have been even more interesting to cast a woman with a disability in the role, (a la Starbuck in the new "Battlestar Galactica", as long as they are focusing on the actor over the script.

Tuesday, June 4, 2013

Disability News

picture of newspaper
NJ Bus Company Settles Disability Notice Requirement
CBS 3, Philadelphia - May 29, 2013

The Justice Department it catching a lot of flack these days; maybe they deserve it, maybe they don't. But, it does seem to me like they are pursuing more ADA cases than they used to, and if so, that's a good thing. When it comes to the Americans with Disabilities Act, private lawsuits are fairly weak; the biggest hammer belongs to the U.S. Department of Justice. This New Jersey bus line case sounds like a simple example of straight-up discrimination ... imposing an inconvenience exclusively on people with disabilities that isn't imposed on other customers. So it's not complicated, but because of that even more important to highlight by getting the Justice Department treatment.

Ben Yakas, Gothamist - May 29, 2013

This article does a remarkably poor job of explaining exactly what the different sides and constituencies want and don't want here. However, if I'm reading it right, and I'm not being misled, it sounds like the opponents of more elevators are using a cost argument, plus a very familiar and very flimsy fairness argument, to try to stem the tide of bulky, space-consuming, annoying wheelchairs in their nice new station. They aren't quite explicit about their real worry, but they're pretty close.

Tami Luhby, CNNMoney - May 30, 2013

Donna Freedman, MSN Money - June 3, 2013


dollar sign
A few additional thoughts on the impending end of the world as we know it, when Social Security Disability "runs out of money":

Similar to how the Social Security Retirement system is supposed to work, Disability payments are drawn from a Trust Fund, which is constantly maintained by the Social Security Taxes paid in by workers. The problem is that for awhile, outgoing payments have amounted to more than the Trust Fund collects from wages. 2016 is the latest estimate of when the Trust Fund will essentially run dry.

One advantage of using a Trust Fund is that it takes politics out of the system, for the most part, in most years. Congress doesn't have to decide each and every year how much money to appropriate for Disability Benefits, because it's got it's own funding system. Maybe the really frightening result of the Trust Fund running dry is that Congress will have to make real decisions that people with disabilities will know about, that affect their lived directly, and that mean far more than blandly kindhearted platitudes about people with disabilities that are so easy to speak.

Snark aside, it's a legitimate question. How much of our federal budget should go to help support people with disabilities who can't find, can't get, or can't keep jobs? Assuming that this is a reasonably compassionate country, and that we agree there's some advantage in people with disabilities not starving or living in the streets en masse, how much of our total economy … our Gross National Product … is a reasonable amount to spend?

"Running out of money" doesn't have to mean what it sounds like it means. It just means that due to several factors … the downturn of the economy, a population that's getting proportionally older, maybe more applicant's not taking one "no" for an answer … the old formula may not be the right one anymore. 

It sucks having to ask for money ... to have to argue why we deserve to live decent lives. It's much more empowering to fight for equal access, dignity, on-time paratransit, etc. Galling as it is, we may soon have to make our case that more … a little more perhaps … is worth allocating on basic, bare-bones support, like Disability. As I said yesterday, if we need to make that case, we'd better start doing it now.

Monday, June 3, 2013

News, Just A Teaser

I am delaying my usual Monday summary of disability-related news stories until tomorrow (Tuesday). However, I do want to share two news stories about the same topic … a new projection that Social Security's Disability Trust Fund will run out in 2016. I'll have more to say about this, and you can also read some past blog posts that touch on the subject here, here, and here.

My short take is that the problem is somewhat different than how it is portrayed, and that we need to start now to make our case that helping people with disabilities by giving them money is good for us, and for the country. It might even be worth a slightly higher portion of our GDP than we spend now.

Tami Luhby, CNNMoney - May 30, 2013

Donna Freedman, MSN Money - June 3, 2013

Sunday, June 2, 2013

tumblr

I just set up a "Disability Thinking" tumblr blog to go along with this blog and the eventual "Disability Thinking" website. For the time being, I'll just be adding links to the blog posts I make here. If and when I figure out exactly what tumblr is uniquely good for, I might get more elaborate with it.

Quote / Unquote

picture of quotation marks
It occurred to me the other day to add a slideshow of disability-related quotes to spruce up the Home Page of Disabilitythinking.com. So, I Googled "disability quotes" and started reading. The results were disappointing.

I found six or seven different quotation collection sites that produced disability-related quotes, but the collections are so similar that I suspect that most of the sites did the same thing I did and just copied all the quotes they found. They're all the same. That would be okay, if the quotes were good, but to my mind the collections are … lame. I found a few interesting quotes … funny, provocative, offering fresh insights or perspectives on disability … but most of them were either blandly uplifting, just plain wrong, and often. For example:
"The only disability in life is a bad attitude." - Scott Hamilton
Far be it from me to question the philosophy of a retired figure skater, but this is wrong both literally and conceptually. I get it. Having a "bad attitude" can limit your own possibilities, and other peoples' bad attitudes can have a limiting effect on you. But real disabilities create real barriers that although worsened by bad attitudes, can't be completely undone by "positive" attitudes. And that's the point of this quote, isn't it? You can't change your inability to walk, hear, or see, but you can change your "attitude", so it is empowering to think that if you just adopt the right mindset, your disabilities won't matter … won't really be disabilities anymore. It's a nice idea, but most people with disabilities know that it doesn't work that way. A positive attitude helps, but it doesn't cure.

Statements like this bother me because they minimize and trivialize disabilities. Not that I want to view my disabilities as all-powerful or insurmountable, but like it or not they exist and they will always have an effect. It subtly encourages people to conclude that if you have a disability and are having a hard time, that it's your fault because you must have a "bad attitude". What constitutes a "bad" attitude anyway? If you complain about inaccessible restaurants or poorly-run transportation services, are you displaying a "bad attitude", or are you being a pro-active advocate? If you are always cheerful and passive in the face of discrimination and neglect, isn't that a "bad attitude" of sorts?

The other thing that bothered me about so many of the quotes I found is that like the Scott Hamilton quote, they are almost completely abstract. They are nearly meaningless collections of words in which one fuzzy, debatable concept is used to bolster another. I read them, and the only thing I can say to them is "Yup," and "So what?"

I'll keep looking, though. Maybe I need to collect some quotes that aren't explicitly about disability, but speak to some concrete truths about the disability experience.

If you have a favorite disability quote, please share it in the Comments.

Saturday, June 1, 2013

This Could Be Good

One of my favorite comedians, Patton Oswalt, tweets that he likes the look of the new Michael J. Fox show, "The Michael J. Fox Show". That recommendation means something to me, and after watching the preview trailer, I think it might end up being a better disability show than the new "Ironside".


"Can you not have a personal victory right now? We're starving!"
Heh!

Change of Plan ...

I decided not to go to Montreal today. As the kids these days say, I'm not feelin' it. Everyone has that feeling sometimes, but I think it's probably a more frequent feeling for people with disabilities. Even fun stuff requires extra layers of planning and gallons of additional energy, and some days it just doesn't seem worth it. Sometimes that's depressing, but quite often it isn't at all. When I can easily envision a really pleasant, rewarding day doing something less taxing than what I'd originally planned, I'll make the last-minute change. It also helps when the original plan was solo, so calling it off or postponing doesn't affect anyone else.

Maybe I'll go sometime next week, on a weekday when the border isn't as busy and there might be fewer other tourists about.

Friday, May 31, 2013

"Pilgrimage"

photo of St. Joseph's Oratory
Photo by Laslovarga via Wikimedia Commons
I'm planning a day trip to Montreal, Quebec tomorrow, and I'll probably visit St. Joseph's Oratory.

St. Joseph's Oratory is a massive domed basilica, built near the top of Mount Royal, smack in the middle of the Island of Montreal. The dome dominates the Montreal Skyline, so much so that when I was a kid, my parents used to offer a quarter to the first person to spot it on the horizon whenever we drove up to Montreal. I'll check for sure tomorrow, but I'd guess that the dome is first visible from about 15 miles away. Wikipedia tells me that St. Joseph's was built between 1904 and 1967, so it was already retro from the day the first brick was laid.

St. Joseph's has always been a pilgrimage site, where according to legend, people with disabilities are healed after climbing … or crawling … up the basilica's long approaching steps. Inside, there is a wall covered with a display of hundreds of crutches supposedly left by pilgrims after their miracle cures. It's kind of a garish, ridiculous-seeming idea, I suspect even for many Catholics (which I am not). But the story's cheese factor is lessened by the basilica's outside grandeur, and most of all by its interior, which is quiet, austere, and haunting … the very opposite of garish. It is the only place of worship that I have ever been in that has come close to spiritualizing my skeptical, materialist heart.

I will NOT be attempting an actual pilgrimage up those steps. If there's some sort of rack inside that would straighten my back and make me taller, I'll give it some thought.