Sunday, October 5, 2014

Disabled TV Character Face-Off: First Round

The votes are in ... or rather I have decided there are enough votes to call it. Here are the 16 contestants for Best Disabled TV Character:

So, now it's time to vote in the first round, pitting two disabled characters in the same show!

Photo of actress Lauren Potter as character Becky Jackson
Becky Jackson
Disability: Down Syndrome.
Role on the show: Secondary character in an ensemble cast. Member of the “Cheerios” high school cheerleading team.

Photo of actor Kevin McHale as character Artie Abrams
Artie Abrams
Actor: Kevin McHale
Disability: Paraplegic due to an accident. Uses a manual wheelchair.
Role on the show: Main character in an ensemble cast. One of the original members of the “New Directions” high school glee club.

Voting in this round will be closed Sunday, October 19, 2014.

Create your free online surveys with SurveyMonkey , the world's leading questionnaire tool.

Weekly Wrap-Up

Disability Thinking Weekly Wrap Up in white letters superimposed over sepia-tone photo of handicapped parking spaces
Disability Thinking, Weekly Wrap-Up. Thinking a lot about work ...

Sunday, September 28, 2014
Monday, September 29, 2014
Tuesday, September 30, 2014
Wednesday, October 1, 2014
Thursday, October 2, 2014
Friday, October 3, 2014
Saturday, October 4, 2014

Saturday, October 4, 2014

For "Special Needs" Parents

Before watching this scene from the first season of “Game Of Thrones”, be warned … violence and blood ahead.


While thinking about my two Disability.TV conversations with Alice Wong, on disabled characters in "Game Of Thrones," I remembered a scene we forgot to talk about.

Bran Stark, who has recently been paralyzed by being pushed out of a tall tower, is the target of an assassin sneaking into his room. His mother, Catelyn Stark fights the man off just long enough for Bran’s pet direwolf to leap to his defense in spectacular fashion.


The scene isn’t about disability, but the emotions in it make me think of all the parents out there with disabled kids. I sometimes have issues with how some parents talk about disability issues, but I never doubt for a moment their dedication and fierceness … not unlike Catelyn, and the direwolf.

Friday, October 3, 2014

Employment Awareness


Six By ’15 - October 3, 2014

October is National Disability Employment Awareness Month, and related articles are starting to appear. The graphic above is the best thing I have seen so far. It clearly and simply communicates the issue we are dealing with … a huge employment gap for people with disabilities in the United States.

Why the gap? That's a much bigger question, with many answers. But it helps to know the size and shape of the problem before trying to understand and solve it.

By the way, the “Six By ’15” coalition looks pretty interesting. It’s the first I have seen of it, but I like the list of sponsors and endorsements, and the six goals all seem pretty well chosen.

Disability.TV Podcast - Game Of Thrones, Part 2

Disability.TV logo on the left, poster of Bran Stark on the right
On this week’s episode of Disability.TV, Alice Wong and I finish our discussion of disabled characters on "Game Of Thrones" … including Bran Stark, Hodor, Shireen Baratheon, Jaimie Lannister, Maester Aemon, Lysa Arryn, and Varys. You can find Alice’s commentaries on disability issues and popular culture at the Disability Visibility ProjectThe Nerds Of Color, and on Twitter @SFdirewolf. Help support the Disability.TV Podcast by making a Paypal donation, or shopping at the Amazon Affiliate links on the Disability Thinking Blog. You can also leave comments there, or email them to: apulrang@icloud.com. Plus, take a moment to post an iTunes review or Tweet what you liked about the episode. Subscribe at iTunes or Stitcher.



In case you missed it, here is the first part of our "Game Of Thrones" discussion:



Upcoming Episodes

October 10
Mini-Cast

October 17
Guest Co-Host Cheryl Green

October 31
Guest Co-Host Kamilah Proctor

November 7
Mini-Cast

November 14
Guest Co-Host Sarah Levis

Thursday, October 2, 2014

China Protests And Disability Policy

I read an article today at Vox.com on why the Chinese government suppresses movements for democracy. The article asserts that they view China as fundamentally weak, threatened, and unstable. This leads them to value order above all and fear that even small increases in individual freedom will lead to society-wide chaos. This is based on a real history of devastating chaos and a rapid fall from unquestioned superiority to being carved up by outside powers.

Meanwhile, we in the United States tend to see China as a strong, vibrant, up-and-coming country, held back only by it’s own government’s outdated, repressive policies.

I think there is a lesson here for understanding people who oppose disability service reforms like phasing out sheltered workshops.

Many families' experiences of disability are suffused with fear, disappointment, betrayal, neglect, and a profound sense of the vulnerability of their disabled loved ones. Many disabled people also share this view about themselves.

Others in the disability community look at the overall situation and see it quite differently. They see that developmentally disabled people are demonstrably capable of more than they have historically been given credit for. Likewise, they see a society that, for all its faults and leftover prejudices, has largely gotten used to developmentally disabled people being visible and active in “mainstream" society.

Some view disability from a position of weakness and vulnerability. Others from a place of strength and possibility. Nether side is completely right or wrong. Both have ample reasons to justify their points of view, if not their preferred policies. It all comes down to how one chooses to look ahead … with pessimism or optimism.

Red Band Society, Season 1, Episode 3 Review

Characters from Red Band Society posed in a circle, looking down.
My review of the 3rd episode of “Red Band Society” is up at Gotta Wach It!

This is a troubled show though the seeds of a good show are still there, buried, with a few more weeks left to sprout before I get tired of waiting. It’s more of a teen soap than a disability show, and that’s okay. It can be a better disability show if it fills in some of its more glaring credibility gaps, including, but not limited to it’s incomplete depictions of chronic illness and disability.

Wednesday, October 1, 2014

Ending Sheltered Workshops: It Can Work

Halle Stockton, Publicsource / Disability Scoop - September 30, 2014

This is a tremendously encoraging article on how Vermont transitioned from sheltered workshops (and closing them), to community employment, while raising the rate of employment for people with developmental disabilities. Cheers to my neighboring state across the lake!

As with all reforms, the keys to success are good followthrough and reforming for the right reasons. One reason why significant numbers of people still oppose phasing out sheltered workshops is that they have seen poor followthrough on disability policy before, and they don’t trust the legislators and bureaucrats who actually have to carry out disability policy reforms.

For one thing, state Developmental Disability service systems have spotty track records, sometimes championing progressive change, but just as often presiding over outdated, neglectful, even barbaric programs and institutions.

Meanwhile even some of the best reforms end up looking a lot like plain old budget cuts. In fact, disability advocates often “sell” progressive change to lawmakers by telling them the changes will save taxpayer’s money. And it’s true! However, many families fought very hard for what little they get, and they view with suspicion anything that looks like economizing.

Finally, similar reforms of other systems show mixed results. Special Education still splits meagre resources between self-contained and inclusive classrooms, and it often seems like schools only embrace inclusion when it suits their need to save money. The widespread closure of mental institutions in the 1980s is a horror story social work professors tell their students … about how the Reagan Administration capitalized on desires for a more humane, liberating mental health system, by shutting places down and then forgetting to reinvest the money saved into community services.

Well-meaning advocates have a noble idea, politicians and policy wonks get ahold if it, ram it through, and vulnerable people suffer. That’s the story I hear starting to be told about the move away from sheltered workshops. It is a potent story that has got to be countered with facts, and with a genuinely careful implementation as seems to have been done in Vermont.

Change is scary, but so is the status quo.

Tuesday, September 30, 2014

Blogging To-Do List

Illustration of a blank To Do List
It has been a little over a year and a half since I started the Disability Thinking blog, and I have accomplished many of the things I set out to do.

I have made 964 posts, this one included, with at least one post pretty much every day.

I have build some sort of regular audience. The blog has over 63,800 total “hits”. That's not a spectacular number, but I am happy with the current rate of around 200 hits per day. Aslo, Disability Thinking has been visited by people from 76 countries, including the United States, with really substantial traffic from Canada, the United Kingdom, and Australia.

I finally started the Disability.TV Podcast, and it is coming along slowly but surely.

It seems like a good time to brainstorm a To-Do List of blog topics I feel I have neglected. For instance:

Faith / Religion and Disability

Assistive Technology

Practical Ideas for Independent Living

Relationships / Sex

I have one more topic in mind that's hard to describe in one line. Basically, it is self-critique … both of my own approach and thinking about disability, and how the disability community as a whole deals with disability. For good reason, disability blogs spend a lot of time explaining and promoting disability-centered approaches to the subject to the wider world. That is important because most people have an entry-level understanding of disability issues, at best. Yet, there are aspects of my own thinking that could use some revision. And there are habits and modes of thinking that are popular in disability culture that I don’t entirely buy into. I hope to deal with this in some way over the coming months. The trick is to do it without undermining support for the disability community, or simply repeating ableist stereotypes.

As always, I welcome comments and suggestions!

Monday, September 29, 2014

Disability, Benefits, & Employment

Jennifer Lazlo Mizrahi, Huffington Post - September 26, 2014

This is a pretty good round-up of the major problems with Social Security’s disability benefit programs … SSDI and SSI … most of which relate to two basic ideas:

1. Disability means an inability to work, and

2. The ability to work is an either-or proposition.

Neither of these concepts are valid today, if they ever were.

Physical or mental disabilities often have an impact on employment, but people with any kind of disability can work for pay, given the right adaptations and opportunity. At the same time, any kind of disability can, at times, make regular work difficult or impossible, even if only temporarily. Then there is that gray area many disabled people find themselves in … able to work for awhile, at something less than full time, and not enough to earn a complete living.

Reforms like the ABLE Act are good ideas, but they don’t quite get at the root of the problem. Two thoughts occur to me:

1. Sever the connection between disability benefits and employment entirely. Make benefits eligibility dependent solely on actual disabilities and individuals’ disability-related needs, regardless of their employment status.

2. Increase subsidies to employers who hire people with disabilities.

I’m not sure these are politically feasible or even good ideas, but they are worth discussing because they might lead to a better understanding of the real relationships between disability, benefits, and employment.

Sunday, September 28, 2014

Disability.TV Podcast - Ep. 9 - Mini-Cast

Excerpts from the last two episodes, a look ahead at upcoming podcasts, and a report on how Disability.TV is doing.



Don’t forget, you can subscribe to the Disability.TV Podcast with iTunes and Stitcher.

Weekly Wrap-Up

Disability Thinking Weekly Wrap Up in white letters superimposed over sepia-tone photo of handicapped parking spaces
“Gaslighting”, Stupid Tweets, and the Persistence of Facilities

Sunday, September 21, 2014
Monday, September 22, 2014
Tuesday, September 23, 2014
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
Thursday, September 25, 2014
Friday, September 26, 2014
Saturday, September 27, 2014

Saturday, September 27, 2014

People Love “Facilities”

Exterior photo of a typical nursing home
It is one of the fundamental questions to ask about any approach to helping disabled people and their families … Should we fund services to individuals wherever they are, or fund the building of “facilities" where they can go to get services?

Since at least the late 19th / early 20th century, the answer has mostly been “build a place”. In the last 20 years or so, the pendulum seems to be swinging very, very slowly in the other direction, away from nursing homes, day treatment centers, sheltered workshops, and the like, towards directly funding the individual personnel and equipment supports people need, in their own homes and workplaces.

Aside from the functional and ideological arguments for and against disability-related “facilities,” it seems to me that “facilities” have certain specific qualities that make them appealing to non-disabled people, even though almost no disabled people really, truly like them, especially if they are aware of the alternatives.
- Building a facility is something to do for disabled people, when you’re not sure you actually know what to do for them. When there’s a facility for “that” kind of person or condition, people feel like something is being done, the problem isn’t being neglected.
- They look impressive, professional. When they are new, bright, clean, and modern, it makes you feel like you are giving disabled people “the best”.
- You can give them cool names. You can name them after a politician, a philanthropist, or even yourself, especially if you are dead.
- They have definite price tags, so it’s simple, (if not easy), to raise money for them. That is party because donors and supporters find it easy to comprehend what they are supporting. Unless they have direct experience with disability issues, most people would rather give money to build the “Awesome Disabled People Center” than to fund “personal assistance services for X number of people”.
- Facilities are easy to quantify. They have X number of “beds”. They have Y number of “slots”. The project will create over Z new jobs!
- Facilities generate lots of jobs, at all skill levels, even after they are built … administrators, comptrollers, supervisors, direct services staff, cooks, and maintenance staff.
- Facilities are great for “revitalizing" small, struggling towns. Either they refurbish abandoned buildings, or add new, impressive visual landmarks to neighborhoods.
- Facilities grant the illusion of safety, order, and control, which many families of disabled people crave … and probably some disabled people, too, though advocates like me don’t like to think about that.
Look, I know that “one size doesn’t fit all”. I know some disabled people might “need” more institutional services. Obviously, there have to be some. But no matter how nice you make them look, facilities almost always suck. If not right away, then more certainly as the years and decades go by.

Plus, once you build them, it is very, very, VERY hard to change your mind and do something different with the money. Facilities take on a life and purpose of their own, separate from the needs and preferences of the people they are supposed to serve. Personalized, directly funded services, on the other hand, can turn on a dime, and a change for one person only affects that person.

Just say no to “facilities”.