I am glad that Derick, Liz and Beth were much stronger than I in their condemnation of this exercise. re-reading my original post it seemed not to convey my revulsion at these reflections. the road to hell is filled with good intensions. These reflections are ableist and/or force disabled people to grab the brass ring of normality and disavow their or others experience of disability.
In my university class my lecture begins with this statement. Many of you chose this elective wanted to learn about disability? Or you want to know how to care for disabled people.?Or how to facilitate the making of disabled people as "normal" as possible? If that is the case you have come to the wrong class!
You are the object of study not disabled people. we are going to interrogate how you and society perpetuate ableism. For those of you who consider yourself disabled we are going to interrogate internalized ableism.
I am not here to inspire you or be pitied by you. I am not here to be catalyst for a cathartic life lesson for you. Or to be an example of how fortunate you are [ie. i am glad i am not crippled sentiment].
i am too busy living my life.
an example of topics to be discussed are how care is poison? How dare you assume I want inclusion. No "normal" person wants to be "just" "normal" - why should disabled people? The vivacity of disability.
Students are shocked unsettled throughout the course and most of them begin where the posted reflections ended. After the initial lecture they are stunned and realize they are upon a path less travelled.. Over the last four years I have had maybe one student drop the course after my initial lecture (often to be replaced by eager students).
As I see the growth in my students at the end of term as compared to the perpetuating of ableism in the posted class I feel sad for the students and the disabled people they will interact. because armed with the self-assuredness of doing good and support of the knowledge supplied by this special education class any resistance to these students ableist behaviour by a "bad-ass cripple" with an attitude will be dismissed as pathology and the individual will suffer the consequences of her or his actions. I have scene this scenario to continue to played out to this day.
with respect
James Overboe
Assistant Professor
Sociology Department
Cultural Analysis and Social Theory M.A. Program
Wilfrid Laurier University
>>> Derick Bird <[log in to unmask]> 06/07/10 4:20 AM >>>
I am in a state of despair having read all of the various SPED 330 Final
Reflection papers as some of the vocabulary used is offensive.
The word 'sufferer' is often used as in "suffers from." which immediately
places the disabled person in the 'sick role' to be passive and submissive
in relation to their disability. 'Handicapped' is used to describe a person
with disabilities. In America the disabled person drives a handicapped car,
parks in a handicapped bay, and displays on their number plate a handicapped
badge. There is a need to distinguish between 'handicapped' and 'disabled'.
As a disabled person I am handicapped by the attitude of others, handicapped
by inaccessible places but in myself I am not handicapped as I will not
allow my disability to handicap me.
These students do not appear to understand the difference between physical
disability and impairment. A person can be physically disabled and also
impaired as in hearing impaired or visually impaired nor are hidden
disabilities discussed. Another word liberally used in their text is 'help'
which assumes they now know all the answers to disability and will act in
the best interests of the disabled person. Surely their role is one of
support to 'enable' and 'facilitate' walking alongside the disabled person
to achieve self determination finding their own true potential. Nowhere do
I read 'empowerment' of the disabled person.
It is unclear how these students are going to handle multi-oppression. The
person of colour who is disabled or the person of colour who is disabled and
is also gay/lesbian/ bisexual. Do these students understand the meaning of
'disablism', 'racism', 'sexism'. 'ageism' and 'homophobia' and how these can
interact against one or the other. I also read, which frightens me, the
declaration of being 'Christian' so how does their religious values and
belief systems ultimately affect their eventual intervention particularly in
the playground where the odd one out is usually bullied by their peers
generating low self esteem and confidence issues. Therefore is Inclusive
Education the right answer as some now doubt this.
A little knowledge is dangerous springs to mind so I do not feel the
facilitator of this course should be congratulated as the content, to date,
can cause more harm than good.
________________End of message________________
This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for Disability Studies at the University of Leeds (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
Enquiries about list administration should be sent to [log in to unmask]
Archives and tools are located at:
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web page.
________________End of message________________
This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for Disability Studies at the University of Leeds (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
Enquiries about list administration should be sent to [log in to unmask]
Archives and tools are located at:
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web page.
|