It is language? Is it identity ? I guess both. But it also include
geography, specific location, history. As much as I admire the social
model, it is not really part of my country's geography or history, therefore
it remains the illusive dream and perhaps never part of the real identity.
Thus, what may be very evident in the UK, and with all due respect of my
fellow Canadian, what you say does make a great deal of sense Jenny Morris
(if I remember correctly) has said something to the effects that "disabled
people" also reminds us that the struggle for liberation is still ongoing.
However, in a country like Québec and to some extent in English Canada where
the ICIDH or PPH( to some extent in Quebec) is dominant. Our more
immediate tasks are to eradicating disabled which implies biomedical nature
of reality.
We all share The end goal. We all agree upon is for liberation of some
sort, However, the tools of our oppression may be similar but not the same
. Perhaps geographically speaking the masters home are different. Therefore,
it is evident that we will need different tools to dismantle different
masters home. That does not mean that we are not moving forward with the
idea of its liberating ourselves and the next generation of people with
disability from the oppression led by the medical model.
Maria
----- Original Message -----
From: "Claire Wickham" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 5:39 PM
Subject: Language, labels and logos
> Someone (sorry, have lost the thread) noted the importance of
understanding
> the argument behind the language. Yes, understanding the argument is
crucial
> if equality is to be attained. In the UK there is, from my experience, a
> particular attitude displayed by those who use "people with disabilities"
in
> preference to "disabled people". Their line of reasoning goes like this:
>
> "Well, of course I agree with the social model, I am rejecting the medical
> model of disability and therefore I look at the individual. Hence, I use
> "person with disabilities". I always put the person first and don't focus
on
> their impairment."
>
> This suggests to me that the social model of disability has not been
> understood, as the person is still viewed as being deficient. What is
being
> implicitly stated is still the medical model with its deficit-based
> premises. The problem resides in the individual and he/she must adapt.
>
> I think this explains why in the UK some of us are very insistent on
> "disabled people" and on an understanding of the social model so that
> progress can be made through institutional change and by removing barriers
> erected by society.
>
> This perspective does not preclude an acknowledgment of individual
> differences or of an individual's right to choose his/her own preferred
form
> of address.
>
> Claire
>
> ________________End of message______________________
>
> Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List
> are now located at:
>
> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
>
> You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
>
>
>
________________End of message______________________
Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List
are now located at:
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
|