Hi folks,
I'm sorry this response is so late in coming, but I've only just waded through
the deluge of "hoddle" and "Ruff" emails of the past few weeks, and perhaps that is
everyone else's excuses as well, but I was rather dissapointed to see that only
three people responded the issue issue raised by John
Homan:
on Fri 29 January homan wrote:
>Having observed this list for some time as a lurker, it
>seems that its focus is on able minded people with flawed
>bodies. People with intellectual disabilities, or there
>parents/carers/advocates are not only under represented,
>but also don't seem to be particularly welcome.
and of those three only one addressed the issue itself.
On Sat, 30 Jan 1999 Gill Dixon wrote:
> >
> > People with disabilities should at times look to thier own
> > discriminatory practice. As a Mother of a child with a
> > 'marginal disability', and at present his advocate,
> > I feel very disabled at times.
> > Gill.
Personally I think this is a rather serious problem that
disability studies in general (with a few notable
exceptions, has largely ignored. Is this our dirty
little secret? One parent told me recently "Unless you
have a sensory or mobility impairment, Disability
Studies doesn't want to know anything about you"
Now I'm not suggesting that this is the case but it is
certainly that case that DS as a discipline has
"underengaged" people with intellectual disabilities.
this isn't meant as an attack on disability studies(as I
consider it my own field) but merely as constructive
criticism meant to spark discussion.
-Gregg
----------------------
Gregg Beratan
[log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
