The problem is always one of liminality for at what point does any
impairment become significant enough. The social model says if anything it
is not the degree of the impairment but the way in which the person is
socially devalued by reference to that impairment that constitutes the
disability.
If one has experienced a devalued perception of oneself resulting from a
lable be that an impairment one or another one such as race, or being any
kind of devalued gruop like travellers or asylum seekers then one is
disabled in the sence that one is not permitted to share the full fruits of
the mainstream society. One can be denied jobs, housing, helth care for many
reasons, and does it matter what the reason is, should there be a heirarchy
in these things, Is human rights to be bartered and traded on a system of I
am above you in the order of injustice ?
Look at the Nazis. they started with developmentally disabled people, they
ended with gypsies and gay people. Asperger had to be very careful about his
writings and one reason why his paer was not widely known as he did not want
those he was treating to end in the death camps as surplus to requirements.
I put it to you that as soon as you start to turn away from someone elses
need then you are in danger of giving another person that same opportunity
to disregard yours.
It is a reletavistic world, and we need to establish a valued position for
ourselves as much as any other gruop. Those who deny this find themselves
inadvertantly siding with the same people who would deny them/
Larry
>
________________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.
|