Saturday, December 14, 2013
Old Arguments and Disability Studies
Girl With The Cane - December 14, 2013
“... people that need that wheelchair ramp to be clear in order to get into the business didn’t ask for the disabilities that make a wheelchair ramp a necessity, and their money is just as good as everyone else’s. Business owners need to ask themselves if they can afford to potentially turn clientele away.”
This is the most widely used argument … aside from adherence to accessibility codes … for making businesses accessible to people with disabilities. For a long time, particularly in the years immediately following the Americans with Disabilities Act, it was a new, almost radical argument. Accessibility isn’t about compassion for the disabled, it’s good business! I still think it’s a very good argument today. The trouble is, I don’t think we really know how good an argument it is. Where are the studies showing not just the potential economic clout of disabled people, but the difference it makes for real businesses when they are or aren’t accessible?
Do disabled people and their families, in fact, shun establishments that aren’t accessible? Are elderly people in significant numbers conscious of accessibility as a distinct issue, in a way that affects their decisions about where to shop and eat? What about other variables, like the age of buildings, downtown vs. urban sprawl locations, and type of business? Are businesses with affordable prices more, or less likely to be accessible? Do accessible businesses tend to be “high end” and expensive? How much can a business actually benefit from improving accessibility? How significant is the loss if they don’t?
I’m not suggesting that the answers to these questions would change our objectives or lessen our commitment to accessibility, but some updated facts might change our tactics, or our understanding of why business people think the way they do about people with disabilities.
Emma Tracey, BBC News Ouch! - December 3, 2013
“One of my concerns with disability studies degrees, is that most of what people are learning about can't be turned into concrete knowledge to improve the general public's understanding of disability. It seems to be very much about phenomenology and post-modernism, which pass most people on the street by."
My questions above reminded me of this piece I read on the BBC "Ouch" website, which includes an interview with Richard Reiser, an Englishman who is both familiar with and critical of "Disability Studies". I think it's the first time I've heard a credible disability activist articulate an essential question I've had for awhile about Disability Studies ... What, exactly does Disability Studies study? And, does it study any of the questions I, as a disabled person, am interested in? We've been using the same arguments and statistics (more or less) that we've been using in discussions of accessibility, economic influence, employment and the like, since at least the early '90s and probably before. It would be helpful if university-based programs whose job is to "study" "disability" would delve into these practical questions, along with the cultural and philosophical pursuits the field is known for.
For all I know, there may be lots of studies by Disability Studies scholars on the psychology of disability discrimination, the economic status of disabled people, what HR professionals really think about hiring disabled people, why disabled people seems of be fair game now for accusations of fraud or laziness, and how disciplined people with disabilities are in fighting for our rights in the marketplace. But if such studies exist, I haven't seen them, and I've been looking.
For all I know, there may be lots of studies by Disability Studies scholars on the psychology of disability discrimination, the economic status of disabled people, what HR professionals really think about hiring disabled people, why disabled people seems of be fair game now for accusations of fraud or laziness, and how disciplined people with disabilities are in fighting for our rights in the marketplace. But if such studies exist, I haven't seen them, and I've been looking.
Friday, December 13, 2013
Don't Let Us Happen To You!
Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty - December 12, 2013
I haven’t been feeling well today, but I’m a little better now, so I’ll just do this quick post.
The article above concerns one of those disability prejudice incidents that are easy to recognize and be outraged over. There’s a person we can be mad at … an enormously privileged and possibly ridiculous person to boot. The problem is that people with disabilities are cast as punishments in cautionary tales all the time. Usually, it’s when there’s some other goal being discussed that has nothing to do with us. We function as a convenient example of what can happen with things or wrong, or when people misbehave.
Doesn’t if feel great to be of use?
Thursday, December 12, 2013
“Pick Yourself Up …"
After I finally started walking, which was when I was 3 years old, my mother at some point told my older brother that she couldn’t let me go outside to play by myself, because when I fell, I wasn’t able to pick myself up again. Ian, who I’m guessing was 17 years old at that time, took me outside in the yard and by watching how I moved in various situations, where my strengths were, and my various ranges of motion, figured out a way that I could get myself up to my feet without help. That’s Occupational Therapy right there … kind of like Christina’s demonstration of standing up on an icy surface with a prosthetic leg. This is another childhood milestone I don’t actually remember, but it sure sounds right. And I know for sure that it meant a lot to Mom.
Wednesday, December 11, 2013
Video Of The Day
This is a pretty good unintentional sequel to last week’s Mannequins video. I love the bit with the woman describing her family’s reaction to each of her four pregnancies.
Random Acts Of Kindness
Just Rollin On - December 10, 2013
This blog post caught my eye yesterday. The blogger, a wheelchair user, describes his conflicting feelings when an older woman in a grocery store ... a complete stranger ... spontaneously offered to pay for his groceries. He describes feeling that his reaction was not what he would have hoped, because he failed to turn down the woman's offer, felt angry and condescended to afterwards, and felt guilty for feeling uncomfortable with the entire scenario.
I have had people offer to let me go ahead of them in lines at cash registers, but I can't recall having anyone offer to pay for stuff I'm preparing to buy. I'm not counting the couple of times in recent years when someone ahead of me in line at a drive through has paid in advance for my cheeseburger and fries. I don't count it because most likely they didn't see me or know that I have disabilities. Also, I've learned that this is a thing people do nowadays ... they "pay it forward" by anonymously treating people they don't know, especially in drive-thrus. The people who do it feel it's a great way to spread happiness without taking selfish credit. Some people receive said happiness with good cheer, while others feel uncomfortable, or ... like me ... wonder if they'd be as generous when it comes to supporting tax-funded support programs like Food Stamps or Unemployment.
Those issues aside, disability can cast a different light on these situations, both for the would-be giver, and the receiver. As is becoming my habit when I'm not sure I've got an issue figured out, I'm just going to make some bullet pointed points about disabled people and "random acts of kindness":
• The whole dilemma is about three entirely different, in some ways conflicting factors that can all be active at the same time:
1. The desire to be kind to strangers, particularly those you perceive to need of kindness.
2. The real need some (or all?) people have for kindness and generosity.
3. The harm and discomfort that can come when social inequality is reinforced or emphasized by unexamined assumptions and lack of sensitivity.
• Actually, number 3 there is the real issue. The receiver is almost always just a little bit ... if not a great deal ... put off balance and made to feel uncomfortable, and unequal, by these out of nowhere gifts, especially when they are public.
• I don't think you have to be cynical to realize that random, unexpected, public generosity ... whatever positives may flow from it ... area actually quite likely to make a recipient uncomfortable. That should just be common sense.
• I'm not a big fan of the anonymous gift in the drive-thru line, but I prefer it slightly to the more public method, like what the blogger describes. Whether or not the woman meant anything but pure kindness, it comes off as a rather self-aggrandizing, attention-seeking gesture. The supposedly desired effect could have been achieved without causing a fuss, but she chose to make her gesture public.
• On the other hand, doing it anonymously almost completely removes the possibility of refusing, while asking first ... which the woman did ... at least makes it possible for the potential recipient to say, "You're so kind, but no, thank you, I've got it." It's the same principle as not immediately starting to push a wheelchair user up a hill, but asking first if they'd like some help.
• Probably the most important factor in a scenario like this is how the would-be giver accepts the turn-down. If they say, "Okay, just thought I'd ask. Have a great day!", then the whole thing becomes just a pleasant interaction, and nobody feels slighted or placed in an unequal position. If instead they insist, it quickly becomes obnoxious.
• If the intended recipient is obviously disabled ... in a wheelchair for example ... then one should assume that the potential for offense is quite high. Not because disabled people are more crabby than others, but because there are just too many ways the gesture can be misinterpreted. This is a good place to "check yourself". Ask yourself, "Why am I offering to buy THIS woman's coffee?" If the answer is anything like, "Because she's using crutches and must have a hard life", then rethink before you act.
• If we disabled people really feel strongly about unsolicited charity, and hate the imbalance it implies, maybe we could do something ourselves to restore balance. Why don't we start offering to pay for random, non-disabled peoples' coffees or groceries? It would be unusual enough that if enough of us started doing it once a week maybe, I'm sure it would make an impression.
I'd be curious to find out what others think. Click below to comment!
Tuesday, December 10, 2013
Photo Of The Day
This is a fascinating blog with a great premise … the little-known problem of early shoe death due to the strange ways of walking that often come with physical disabilities.
Advocacy To Serve
IsraelSeen.com - December 7, 2013
I don’t know how the heck I found this article, but it got me really excited.
When I was a Junior in High School, we all took a standardized test used by the military to identify aptitudes for different military occupations. It was kind of fun, and I thought nothing of it. A few months later, I started getting brochures in the mail from different branches of the military. Then, one evening, our dinner was interrupted by a call from a Navy recruiter who wanted to tell me how awesome the submarine service was. He actually never spoke to me, but my father toyed with him for awhile, before asking him how they would accommodate my disabilities. At the time, I thought the whole thing was kind of funny, and I have never had any desire to serve in the military, even as a childhood fantasy.
Still, I occasionally think about this incident, and how truly strange it is that I couldn't serve in the military, even though there are plenty of things I could have done that have nothing to do with physical fitness ... useful things not requiring living in a submarine, riding in a tank, flying a fighter jet, or going on a foot patrol. Which is why this Israeli man's successful self-advocacy excited me. His physical disabilities are if anything more significant than mine, but he's doing his part. Obviously, he's motivated by beliefs I have a hard time relating to, but that’s beside the point. He wanted to serve, and seems to have known, on some level, that there had to be a way he could do so. His advocacy was personal and persistent, and successful.
When will something like this happen her in the USA? When will a highly motivated disabled young person offer him or herself to the military long enough and sincerely enough to break through to a real service role?
Monday, December 9, 2013
Video Of The Day
There’s nothing actually very new in this video, about the Croatian Paralympic Team, but for some reason it’s just better than most of the videos like it that I’ve seen. I think maybe it’s the lack of dialog or slogans. I’m really starting to think that this is the secret key to disability images … let the pictures do the talking; we’ll get the point.
Of course, having written about it, I've ruined it.
Disability News
Maggie Clark, Pew / Stateline Staff Writer, USA Today - December 6, 2013
The case involves the State of Florida, which uses only IQ to determine whether a convicted person is “mentally retarded” and therefore ineligible for execution. A few other states use very narrow or very difficult to prove criteria to determine intellectual disability, while most states use a “3 prong” approach that takes several factors into consideration. It sounds like the Supreme Court might be ready to give clearer, possibly better criteria to all the states.
I’ve still never heard anyone discuss how legally defining intellectual disability in death penalty cases might affect non-criminal cases like competency and guardianship. Since I oppose the death penalty, I’d be glad to see any ruling that removes more “borderline” cases from death row. But, I’m also worried what else might happen when more people are deemed legally not responsible for their actions, due to intellectual disability. Lots of intellectually disabled people would benefit from having more responsibility and autonomy in their lives.
Benjamin Weiser and Matt Flegenheimer, New York Times - December 5, 2013
Obviously, this is a great victory for disabled people in New York City. As someone who lives in a small town, though, I’m hoping that in a few years, used accessible cabs from New York might provide more accessible service in rural areas. Where I live, even one accessible taxi would make a huge difference.
Hillel Aron, LA Weekly - December 5, 2013
After reading this story, I went looking for information on LA Weekly, wondering if it was a heavily partisan, right-wing newspaper. It seems not. It's more like the Village Voice, a little "out there", but artsy, and left-of-center. So, I’m even more disgusted at the story, and afraid of how many otherwise sensible people will start to believe that this one guy is indicative of some sort of ugly trend. More specifically, this is just shoddy journalism. The article refers to a “sizable but unknown amount of cash” the man has collected from his ADA lawsuits. If the amount is unknown, how do you know it’s sizable? The article explains that only California law permits collecting damages from ADA lawsuits. So really, it isn’t the ADA at all … it’s a California law he’s suing under. It may be modeled on the ADA, but it isn’t the ADA, which is a Federal law. And the cartoon at the top of the article is really pretty offensive and snide.
I really worry that the next big thing in the social history of disability is going to be the general public buying into a whole matrix of myths that cast us as dishonest, lazy, selfish, irritating, and delusional. These are already active, but I'm concerned that they will take the next step from shameful prejudices won't admit to, to hip, cynical joke themes enjoyed by "smart" readers of alternative weeklies like the LA Weekly.
Sunday, December 8, 2013
Weekly Wrap-Up
This week in "Disability Thinking" ...
Sunday, December 1, 2013
Monday, December 2, 2013
Tuesday, December 3, 2013
Wednesday, December 4, 2013
Thursday, December 5, 2013
Friday, December 6, 2013
Saturday, December 7, 2013
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)