Hi Elizabeth
Don't worry about your shameful admission - we are used to it! We are
perhaps less used to your degree of humility so good on you also.
Although education is not my 'specialist' area, I have been impressed by:
John T Hall's: 'Social Devaluation and Special Education - The Right to Full
Mainstream Inclusion and an Honest Statement', Jessica Kingsley, London,
1997, and 'Making Difficulties - Research and the Construction of SEN'
edited by Peter Clough and Len Barton, Paul Chapman Publishing, London,
1995.
I fear that your plans to write on the subject may take you from 'lurking'
into a position that some of us (d.p.'s) are less sanguine about. I don't
know why (not being an expert on those poor a.b.'s) but experience for many
of us is Orwellian - some are more equal than others - the community still
appears to find a.b. 'experts' far preferable to d.p. 'experts' (even though
they have the same or better qualifications). And, once lauded as an
'expert', humility appears to be the first casualty!
For me, this is the central problem in the 'a.b. in disability studies'
debate. it doesn't matter how reasonable, how measured d.p.'s response -
experience (merely anecdotal and therefore empirically unsound I grant you -
or are we into the oppression of research funding debate?) has shown that
whilst d.p. provide a good visual clue when a.b.'s are engaged in 'good
works', they are entirely unacceptable in any role that presumes to set them
as 'equal'.
I know the emancipatory/participatory arguments, but attempts at empowering
d.p. through the work of a.b.'s has yet to reveal significant parity in
outcomes for the d.p.'s that take part in research and the a.b. who does it.
Before being further reviled, I should perhaps admit that, on an
intellectual level, I am fine with a.b.'s in disability studies, so long as
their work contributes to greater understanding of the oppression etc. etc.
etc., but on a personal level, I long for the day when a d.p. can be seen as
something other than a d.p.
Just to ensure that I am accused of letting personal experience overwhelm
objectivity (hardly a new allegation for d.p. in this field of study), let
me give you an example or two...
As the Director of Research for an international disability and human rights
charity, I attended a conference on housing and disabled people, organised
by one of the more 'right on' county councils in the UK. Whilst the a.b.'s
(without exception) had name badges that attested to their professional
competency (Director of Sanitary Ware Selection, Manager of Forms etc.), and
despite attending in a 'professional' capacity, my badge said 'user'. I
lived in the county, I used a wheelchair, therefore I must be a 'user' - see
the logic?
More alarmingly, I also attend disability-related
summits/conferences/briefing sessions organised by (well known but for
present purposes anonymous) supra-national governmental agencies, and listen
to various a.b.'s telling these policy-makers that d.p. are unable to pursue
their own agenda, without the help of a.b. experts/facilitators/case
managers/therapists and on and on and on...
None of the foregoing is 'your fault', but I wonder whether you understand
my (albeit contradictory) position?
Perhaps the acid test is similar to that of the glass ceiling and women -
how many a.b.'s could cope with being in a subordinate position to a d.p.?
I don't presume to know the answer, neither do I expect any, but it might
act as a sobering exercise for some (albeit reductio ad absurdum).
I am genuinely delighted by the opportunity that has been offered to you,
and I am sure that you will do a wonderful job (genuinely); I just wonder
how we solve the bigger issue? For that matter, I wonder how many would see
this honest response as indicative of how 'bitter, warped and twisted' I am?
Kind regards
Richard Light
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|