This is a very interesting discussion, Claire.
If you can put your horns on, Ian, I will take my gloves
off and take the bait - there are few enough chances
for disabled people to have ANY real roles in our society.
For a disabled person to have a chance to actually CHANGE
something - isn't that something we should all earnestly
desire?
Also disabled people tend to know other disabled people for
all sorts of socio-economic reasons - so are more aware of
other disabilities and issues affecting others asd well as
themselves. And it is very hard to get through to some
non-disabled just how &*VV(y awful the system can be.
Evelyn
(taking the disabled part as I have slight disability
myself and rest of family have fairly severe disabilites)
On Tue, 31 Jul 2001 00:22:35 +0100 Automatic digest
processor <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 10:30:29 +0100
> From: Ian Webb <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: representation
>
> Continuing with my horns firmly on - if this person is to be empowered
> to speak on behalf of disabled people - why do they have to have a
> disability themselves?
>
> Ian
>
>
>
> Date sent: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 12:05:18 +0100
> Send reply to: "Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff." <[log in to unmask]>
> From: Clare Davies <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: representation
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> > Perhaps an effective consultation process is needed, to enable a disabled
> > person (or persons) to represent to wider views of disabled people rather
> > than just their own viewpoint based on their personal experiences. It is
> > all too easy for a disabled person to be invited to a committee as a token
> > gesture, without being empowered to participate effectively and act as a
> > representative of disabled peoples' views.
> >
> > Clare
> > ----------
> > >From: claire wickham <[log in to unmask]>
> > >To: [log in to unmask]
> > >Subject: Re: representation
> > >Date: Wed, Jul 25, 2001, 5:00 pm
> > >
> >
> > > Suzanne,
> > >
> > > <some stuff deleted>
> > >
> > > For several years now, I have been questioning the validity of an equal
> > > opportunities committee where none of the members has had disability
> > > equality training and no one has knowledge or expertise that would
> > > enable them to in any way represent disabled people. One of the
> > > answers that I have received is that there are no members of the
> > > committee from minority groups and that it would be impossible to
> > > represent every minority group on such a committee. (This, I think,
> > > questions the whole basis of such an EO Committee, but never mind!)
> > >
> > > I think there are two types of representation:
> > >
> > > 1. Where the interests of disabled people are to be represented at a
> > > committee whose prime function is not disability focused. for example,
> > > a meeting of heads of department. I suppose I could just about
> > > justify representation by a non disabled person here, provided that
> > > they had knowledge of the views of disabled people and were working
> > > from a disability equality perspective. Clearly if the person was
> > > disabled themselves, this would add to their representative powers.
> > > But, thinking about this, it would seem strange to have the interests
> > > of women, for example, represented by a male and for the interests of
> > > minority ethnic groups to be represented by a white Anglo-Saxon person!
> > > So, perhaps I am saying that of course the person should be disabled
> > > themselves. However I can conceive of some cases where interests might
> > > be represented by a non disabled person, probably most of these cases
> > > would be once offs or short term projects rather than longer term
> > > committee work. For example, if, the head of our department was
> > > representing our views that a HOD forum, I would expect him to raise
> > > issues concerning disabled members of staff but then he would have been
> > > very well briefed about these.
> > >
> > > but, if the meeting was about access issues then I would expect a
> > > disabled representative to be co-opted or for the head of department
> > > to have carried out a consultative exercise prior to the meeting.
> > >
> > > however, you raise the question of
> > >
> > >>
> > >> A colleague was recently invited to be on a panel looking at an
> > >> important disability issue. When she told me, I asked her how
> > >> disabled people's views on this issues were going to be included or
> > >> represented. Her response was that it wasn't necessary to have
> > >> disabled people on the panel because a "competent professional"
> > >> could represent the views of disabled people.
> > >
> > > I think you are quite right to be shocked by that as this is rather
> > > different case. This is the second type of representation. Here the
> > > panel has a mandate to seek out the views of
> > > disabled people and they should therefore clearly be extending their
> > > remit to include disabled people themselves, with the proviso that
> > > such people are representative and are not there as individuals to put
> > > forward their own personal agendas and experiences. I cannot see any
> > > argument for confining representation to the views of a select
> > > professional.
> > >
> > > Perhaps your colleague could suggest that the group co-opt's at least
> > > one disabled person who can represent the views of disabled people.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I have heard it said that parents of disabled
> > >> people can represent disabled people on such working groups. Can
> > >> this be right, and would we say the same about an ethnic minority
> > >> or a gender working group?
> > >
> > > my response to this would be, well "No" of course parents cannot
> > > represent disabled people, but as users of services they might well
> > > wish to be involved in the consultation process.
> > >>
> > > and to return to my own situation, concerning the lack of
> > > representation of disabled people on the equal opportunities committee,
> > > I have also been told that of course the committee will co-opt selected
> > > people whenever there are disability issues to discuss. To this I reply
> > > that over the past five years the Access Unit has never been consulted
> > > by the equal opportunities committee and it seems strange that such a
> > > committee would never have wished for any expert advice on disability
> > > issues! If representation is not built into such committees, and it is
> > > left to the ill informed committee members to decide when the views of
> > > disabled people are relevant, this is exactly what happens -- the
> > > uninformed do not realise that the views of disabled people should be
> > > taken into account on a wide range of policy issues.
> > >
> > > Best of luck and I hope some of this is of interest.
> > >
> > > Claire
> > >
> > >> Email: [log in to unmask]
> > >> ------- End of forwarded message -------
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Susanna Hancock
> > >> Equal Opportunities Officer
> > >> HRS
> > >> Telephone: 020 8411 6873
> > >> Email: [log in to unmask]
> > >> ------- End of forwarded message -------
> > >>
> > > [log in to unmask]
> > >
> > > --- End Forwarded Message ---
> > >
> > >
> > > ----------------------
> > > Claire Wickham
> > > Director: Programmes, Research and Development
> > > Access Unit
> > > University of Bristol
> > > Union Building
> > > Queen's Road
> > > Clifton
> > > Bristol BS8 1LN
> > >
> > > Tel: 0117 954 5710
> > > Textphone: 0117 954 5715
> > > Fax: 0117 954 5714
> > >
> > > [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
> -------------------------------
> Ian Webb, MNADO, MMU Learning Support Unit,
> All Saints, Oxford Rd,
> Manchester M15 6BH
> 0161 247 3477
> [log in to unmask]
<snip>
> End of DIS-FORUM Digest - 27 Jul 2001 to 30 Jul 2001 (#2001-84)
> ***************************************************************
Evelyn Toseland
Webmaster
Faculty of Applied Sciences
University of the West of England, Bristol
;;<>;;<>;;<>;;<>;;<A>;;<>;;<>;;<>;;
A Webmaster is a machine for converting coffee into HTML.
;;<>;;<>;;<>;;<>;;<A>;;<>;;<>;;<>;;Email: [log in to unmask]
Alternative email [log in to unmask]
Work phone: 344 2493; sometimes 344 4448.
If not, try 344 4448 or 344 2417!
----------------------------------------
|