Hi Riku,
While it is true the WFD and WBU and perhaps we can add WFDB had very
strong and influential lobbyists during the formulation of the UNCRPD,
it is to be noted that "environment" is vital in the education of the
deaf, the blind and the deafblind. Unlike those without sensorial
limitations, the regular environment may suffice except for the
physical acceessibility features.
For the sensorial groups, there has to be that environment which
requires the closer and nearly individualize approach in the
transmission of information, skills and values.
We have to remind ourselves, I being blind too and with difficulties in
hearing, there are major aspects in absorbing information that we are
deprived of and that is the body language of the teachers and fellow
learners, including facial expressions and gestures. And these
essentials are accessible to the non blind, non deaf and the non deafblind.
Now, I could not speak for those with intellectual and developmental
disabilities, for the issues for them may be different and diversed.
What I can forward now is that uniformity of environment, approaches
and technology could not be the meaning of the term inclusion, for if
uniformity equal inclusion this CRPD may be in favor of disadvantaging
certain groups and types of disabilities.
Regards,
Lauro
Original message:
> Dear all,
> Thank you for many comments.
> I am trying to understand why Article 24 refers only some types of
> disabilities relating to the phrase "in environments which maximize...".
> I understand that sign language and "suitable environments" have combined.
> Still, why blind people are mentioned but not physically disabled? It
> sounds irrational because, for instance, wheelchair users need "suitable
> environment".
> Originally I thought this phrase means special education is - if needed -
> allowed to blind, deaf and deafblind, not other types of disabilities.
> After more thinking, such interpretation is not rational. Anyway, my point
> is to understand why these three types of disability are mentioned when
> "environment which maximize" are mentioned.
> How the phrase differs from "Effective individualized support measures are
> provided..." phrase?
> I live in a Nordic country and our trend is towards integrated education
> with support measures. Older, traditional special schools still exist and
> these are more resource centres.
> I am thankful if anyone could try to explain why the word "environment"
> has written twice if there is any exact explanation. I do not assume it is
> a mistake of drafters? Is it a result of strong lobbying from WFD and WBU?
> What was the purpose?
> Regards,
> Riku
> ________________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.
|