With your contributions Jan, the views on "PROTECTIONISM" is getting
more complete.
We want to develop a consensus on the term and perhaps, we can work on
the term legal Capacity as a result.
Thanks,
Lauro
Original message:
> I like your discussion of protectionism. I'd add that protectionism
> has the premise that there is someone who is more competent who can
> provide protection to someone less able. It can be the antithesis to
> self-empowerment, self-reliance and independence. Protectionism tries
> to encapsulate a person in safety whereas self-empowerment allows a
> person to grow and bloom.
> Very truly yours,
> Jan E. Friedman
> Attorney
> Disabiltiy Rights Oregon
> 6120 SW Broadway, 2nd Flr.
> Portland, OR 97205
> (503) 243-2081 (phone)
> (503) 243-1738 (fax)
> --
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message is for the sole use of the
> intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
> information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution
> is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
> the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: The Disability-Research Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Lauro Purcil
> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 12:49 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Contentious issue with a publication
> Well stated Claudia. I can't help but make this comment.
> Lauro
> Original message:
>> Hi, Mike
>> Here s how I would define protectionism, although I m sure there are
>> other examples that could be given:
>> Protectionism is when beliefs and practices concerning disabled people
>> are based on an ethos of protecting them from harm rather than
>> offering them information and choices. Many people with disabilities
>> have been subject to protectionism in terms of their sexual lives
>> because guardians, caregivers and decision-makers presume that they
>> are too na ve, too vulnerable or too incapable to make decisions for
>> themselves about relationships, sexuality and reproduction. Similarly,
>> in much research about disability from a medical model perspective,
>> the rights of disabled people to guide and be included in research has
>> been limited by gatekeepers who worry that speaking about disability
>> might do disabled people more harm than good.
>> Thanks for the question,
>> Claudia
>> From: micox [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 9:43 AM
>> To: Malacrida, Claudia
>> Cc: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Contentious issue with a publication
>> Hi.
>> Please excuse this simple Welshman's (in exile in Norfolk UK)
>> ignorance but can someone tell me what `protectionism` is?
>> Heddwch
>> Mike.
>> Mike Llywelyn Cox,
>> http://micoxpplog.blogspot.com <http://micoxpplog.blogspot.com>
>> Trustee with Equal Lives (formerly, Norfolk Coalition of Disabled
>> People) www.equallives.org.uk <http://www.equallives.org.uk>
>> with National Survivor User Network (NSUN) www.nsun.org.uk
>> <http://www.nsun.org.uk>
>> with Shaping our Lives www,shapingourlives.org.uk and
>> www.solwork.org.uk <http://www.solwork.org.uk>
>> All views and statements expressed in these e mails are entirely my
>> own unless stated otherwise
>> On 20/05/14 20:49, Malacrida, Claudia wrote:
>> Hi, Leslie,
>> Thanks for your feedback. The editors have left it to me as to how I
>> want to respond, but before I go back to them, I m looking for some
>> ideas about how I might best do that. They do invite me to simply keep
>> the paper as is , but I am thinking that this feedback could be the
>> basis for a meaningful substantive addition to the paper to point
>> out that idea of protectionism is often used to undermine speech.
>> I will acknowledge that some of my reaction is personal I am a bit
>> stunned by the tone of the review, and also by the editors who don t
>> seem to be able to understand that this comment is itself troubling in
>> terms of what kinds of people can speak and what sorts of ideas they
>> should express. The reviewer s comment, The author needs, as do all
>> scholars, to have enough humility to ask, Are there people who should
>> be protected from interviewers like myself in their own interests? is
>> actually in keeping with the kind of protectionism I describe in the
>> chapter. The Reviewer seems to assume that people with disabilities
>> are too weak or vulnerable to be able to speak about their experiences
>> or to know whether they wish to speak about them the implication is
>> that I am abusing people by asking their opinions. I think this is an
>> important assumption to challenge.
>> I wonder if people on this list have input as to whether it is ethical
>> or reasonable on my part to use this person s commentary in a revision
>> to the paper as a way to point out that protectionism is not only
>> present in the helping community but that it also exists and is
>> problematic in the academy. I also wonder if my own emotional response
>> is leading me to consider something I shouldn t.
>> Best,
>> Claudia
>> From: Roman, Leslie [mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 1:25 PM
>> To: Malacrida, Claudia; [log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> Subject: RE: Contentious issue with a publication
>> Hi Claudia,
>> We all get reviews from time to time that we don t like or find
>> infuriating. Why not simply express your views on protectionism to the
>> editors and simply ask them to reconsider?
>> I am not sure the list-serve is the best place to resolve your
>> concerns with the editors. I would suggest speaking directly with them.
>> Leslie
>> From: The Disability-Research Discussion List
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of Malacrida,
>> Claudia
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 11:48 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> Subject: Contentious issue with a publication
>> Hello, all
>> I was invited to include a previously published paper in an anthology
>> of readings on Oral History. The chapter engages with barriers to
>> conducting research on an institution for mental defectives in
>> Alberta. The project was stymied by protectionism on several fronts
>> guardians who wouldn t provide permission to survivors for interviews,
>> archives with Freedom of Information regulations that made locating
>> files very difficult and very expensive, and officials who would not
>> provide access to the institution even for a tour. The point of the
>> paper is to ask whether protectionism is actually working in the
>> service of those who already wield power, and instead operates to
>> disempower those who would speak about their own histories.
>> The reviews are in, and below is a snippet from the Editors. They ask
>> me to consider revising the paper, saying that alluding to the debate
>> would probably strengthen your argument and chapter but they leave it
>> up to me what I want to do. I m tempted to treat this as another
>> example of protectionism and write it in as such but I welcome
>> feedback .Here is the review:
>> The reviewers were particularly enthusiastic about your chapter and
>> viewed it as a crucial and unique guide that, in the words of Reviewer
>> 1, gets at institutional obstacles to having all voices heard, with
>> emphasis here on the most vulnerable individuals.
>> The reviewers did not request any revisions, except that Reviewer 1
>> wished for a more balanced view. Here are his/her comments:
>> This [chapter] is flawed by its assumption that everyone is better off
>> somewhere else than in a place like the Michener Centre. No doubt most
>> are and that was the argument for emptying such places in the 1960s
>> when deinstitutionalization of both the clearly mentally challenged
>> and the questionably mentally ill occurred. We now know that that this
>> has had mixed results and that many of the homeless are people who, in
>> another era, might have lived a little longer and perhaps even had
>> better lives overall if they or their families could have access to
>> places like the Michener Centre. Similarly, the constant stories of
>> disabled people being abused by their own families or foster families
>> within the privacy of homes has raised issues of whether private homes
>> are always better than institutions, where sadistic people, at least
>> some of the time, control themselves somewhat for fear of being ratted
>> by fellow workers or get fired when they don t. The author needs to
>> demonstrate that she has at least a minimal awareness that not
>> everyone would agree with her that there is no such thing as mental
>> illness or that protective institutions are an oxymoron, the horrors
>> of the eugenics program at the Michener Centre notwithstanding. And
>> she needs, as do all scholars, to have enough humility to ask, Are
>> there people who should be protected from interviewers like myself in
>> their own interests? In brief, she needs to demonstrate that she is
>> not so out of it as to think that everyone is severely normal and able
>> to look out for their own needs. Sometimes a bit less Foucault and a
>> bit more experience of the real world benefits academics.
>> Suggestions?
>> BTW, if you wanted some context, the original article is in
>> downloadable form here (I hope links being what they are):
>> https://www.academia.edu/1531146/Contested_memories_efforts_of_the_pow
>> erful_to_silence_former_inmates_histories_of_life_in_an_institution_fo
>> r_mental_defectives
>> <https://www.academia.edu/1531146/Contested_memories_efforts_of_the_po
>> werful_to_silence_former_inmates_histories_of_life_in_an_institution_f
>> or_mental_defectives>
>> Thanks.
>> Claudia Malacrida
>> Professor and Chair, Department of Sociology
>> University of Lethbridge
>> UHall A-890, 4401 University Drive
>> Lethbridge, Alberta
>> Canada T1K 3M4
>> Tel: (403) 329-2738
>> Fax: (403) 329-2085
>> email: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> http://directory.uleth.ca/users/claudia.malacrida?no_headers=1
>> <http://directory.uleth.ca/users/claudia.malacrida?no_headers=1>
>> http://uleth.academia.edu/claudiamalacrida
>> <http://uleth.academia.edu/claudiamalacrida>
>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
>> This e-mail message, including any and all attachments, is only for
>> the use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that
>> is confidential or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient,
>> you are advised that any dissemination, copying or other use of this
>> e-mail is prohibited. Please notify the sender of the error in
>> communication by return e-mail and destroy all copies of this e-mail.
>> Thank you.
>> ________________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
>> <http://www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies>).
>> Enquiries about list administration should be sent to
>> [log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> Archives and tools are located at:
>> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
>> <http://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
>> <http://www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies>).
>> Enquiries about list administration should be sent to
>> [log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> Archives and tools are located at:
>> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
>> <http://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]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> Archives and tools are located at:
>> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
>> <http://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.
________________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.
|