I can't honestly summon up the energy to pursue this line. I did not use
'inspirational' as a sterotypical anything!
I used it as I meant it...'prompting and infusing feeling into another.'
I wrote it in response to Zoe's mailing, as I thought that she was using the
word along those lines.
I do not impose that view on my own child, because the feeling is mine, not
his.
He certainly doesn't require a cure or change. He is fine in my eyes,
*exactly* the way he is.
Of course you have a right to your opinions, which are as valid as anyone
elses, but it unwise to assume things of others.
Gill.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [log in to unmask]
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Johnson
> Cheu
> Sent: 08 March 1999 23:14
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: RE: dismay at terminlology
>
>
> Gill-- and anyone else--
>
> Not to be overly critical, but as I've said before, part of coming to
> disability identity for some is rejection of stereotypes and that this
> sometimes means rejection of parental influences/notions.
>
> While I cannot speak about your son and his influence on you, I
> think it is
> worth mentioning that something like 'inspirational' is a stereotype that
> is contested by some -- Anne Finger in Ragged Edge comes to mind; Nancy
> Mairs in Waist High, or the rebelling against the whole poster-child
> syndrome.
>
> I do not of course mean to critique anyone's parenting skills-- having had
> the same kind of conversation with my Dad recently, I've come to realize
> that I can't "change" him, beyond baby shifts, and that his perspective on
> what parents should do --"cure" make better"--though different from my own
> interpretation of my impairment/disability is nonetheless valid. To argue
> otherwise means for me a forry into "right/wrong" binarisms I don't desire
> to get into with him.
>
> But I mention this here because I think it's important for
> parents who take
> this view of inspiration, what-not to attempt to recognize the limits on
> that thinking and what that may impose on a child who might not view
> him/herself in terms of these labels.
>
> Best,
>
> Johnson
>
> >I so agree with Zoe,
> >
> >that particular word...suffer... really grates on my nerves, and
> offends me.
> >My son does not suffer as a result of his actual condition, but more as a
> >result of the ignorance around it.
> >
> >'Inspirational', 'remarkable', ' emotionally intelligent',
> 'forgiving' and a
> >'priveledge' are words that spring to mind when I think of him. He has
> >taught me so much.
> >
> >How much we have to learn...
> >Gill.
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: [log in to unmask]
> >> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of
> >> Z.Holland
> >> Sent: 08 March 1999 13:19
> >> To: [log in to unmask]
> >> Subject: Re: dismay at terminlology
> >>
> >>
> >> Dear Keith and all,
> >>
> >> I really do agree with what you wrote about terminology, Keith. In a
> >> similar vein, what really gets to me is when the word 'suffering' is
> >> so readily used to describe people who have a medical condition of
> >> some kind - as though by simply having such a condition, they are
> >> automatically a victim or sufferer. On the radio yesterday,
> the views of
> >> parents of children who 'suffer' from Down's syndrome were discussed
> >> (in connection with health services). Why couldn't the broadcaster
> >> be non-colourful and neutral in simply saying 'people who *have* Down's
> >> syndrome'? My sister (soon to be 16) has Down's syndrome, yet - in
> >> spite of mild related health 'problems' (hole in the heart) - she
> >> really doesn't
> >> 'suffer' at the hands of the syndrome at all. She is an
> >> inspirational, happy and fun-loving person.
> >>
> >> Why should an entire group of people - many of whom love life,
> >> and happily get on with it ... often unaware of even having a medical
> >> condition - be assumed to be 'suffering', just because they have been
> >> identified as having a medical condition? Negative terminology
> >> (like 'suffering') - freely used on national radio - widely
> >> encourages people to feel only useless and patronising pity
> >> towards people
> >> who have Down's syndrome (or dyslexia, diabetes etc. ... anything
> >> 'different'), and to perceive them as unhappy and dependent. From my
> >> experience of working with many adults and children who have Down's
> >> syndrome - and from knowing and loving my younger sister - this just
> >> isn't what it's all about! Words like 'respect', 'inspiration',
> >> 'fun', and 'love'
> >> paint a totally different - and often more accurate - picture.
> >>
> >> Words have the potential to build a bridge of mutual understanding and
> >> respect between non-disabled and disabled people ... or to
> drive a wedge
> >> of ignorance and misunderstanding between them. It is *SO* important
> >> that we choose the right ones in the right contexts.
> >>
> >> Best wishes,
> >>
> >> Zoe Holland
> >> ([log in to unmask])
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sunday 7 March 1999, Keith Ripley wrote ...
> >>
> >>
> >> Dismay at the language surrounding children with Special
> educational needs
> >>
> >> Am I just a pedant, or are there others whose spirits sink
> when they open
> >> newly published books, from the likes of the Open University & others
> >> (e.g. Mackinnon, D et al 1997 Education in Western Europe.
> Facts & figures
> >> ) & find these terms used physically & mentally disadvantaged (page
> >> 13) severity of the child, handicap or problem mild
> mental handicap,
> >> serious mental handicap (page28).
> >>
> >> A book such as this could be published in the UK using either the
> >> terminology of the 1981 Education Act or the current
> terminology used to
> >> define schools in this country. It could include a glossary of terms
> >> highlighting the variations across European countries, & a
> statement from
> >> 1 or more organizations for disabled people, stating why they
> do not want
> >> to be known as handicapped, & the term(s) that they do prefer.
> >>
> >> The Open University & other publishing bodies have a duty to educate as
> >> well as to maintain standards. This includes challenging sloppy &
> >> inaccurate use of language, such as special needs oh for a
> world where
> >> people did not refer to themselves as oh I work with
> special needs, as
> >> though children in this country exist in 2 separate bodies & that such
> >> categorization could inform so completely ..
> >>
> >> If Im the only one who feels like this I promise I will desist from
> >> highlighting such facts in student assignments.
> >>
> >> Yours hopefully,
> >>
> >> Keith Ripley [log in to unmask]
> >>
> >>
>
>
> Johnson Cheu
> [log in to unmask]
> http://people.english.ohio-state.edu/cheu.1
> Dept. of English*Ohio State University*421 Denney Hall*164 W. 17th.
> Ave.*Columbus, OH 43210*(614) 292-1730 (O)*292-6065(D)*292-7816(Fax)
>
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|