Tuesday, November 13, 2007

Comment Paper- Week 9

Comment Paper- Week Nine

Goble, Colin (2004). Dependence, Independence and Normality, pp 41- 46 in John Swain, Sally
Sally French, Colin Barnes and Carol Thomas (eds.). Disabling Barrier Enabling Environments, 2nd Edition (London: Sage).

Priestly, Mark. Disability: A Life Course Approach: Great Britain: MPG Books Ltd., 2003. 117-
142.

Wilton, Robert D. Working at the Margins: Disabled People and the Growth of Precarious
Employment, pp 129- 150 in Pothier, Dianne and Richard Devlin. 2006. Critical
Disability Theory: Essay in Philosophy, Politics, Policy, and Law (Vancouver: UBC Press).

You are a young adult or teenager....now try and imagine being compared to an elderly individual or a child in society? Next take a minute to consider having another person make important personal, life and financial decisions for you. Lastly think about the idea of being institutionalized because you are seen as unfit to care for yourself. Do all of these statements sound insensitive or unjustifiable? Well unfortunately all of the above situations are a harsh reality of the constant dilemmas facing today’s impaired and disabled society. This reality is true for many individuals in society as they experience such situations on a daily basis. As discussed in all three articles, disability is seen as a non adult status that requires the assistance from an able- bodies adult, an institution, or the government in order to live somewhat of a normal life. In short, many individuals view disabled people in society as not normal therefore require special or extra treatment to deal with what we perceive as common everyday independent tasks and employment opportunities. The role of disabled people is to accept professional guidelines in anticipation of achieving normalcy.
In Western society, adulthood is defined by independence, competence and autonomy. As both Goble’s article and Priestley’s book state, with the rise of the urban industrial environment, people with physical, sensory and economic impairments became socially and economically marginalized and soon became a burden to families. With this shift came “changes in technology, gender roles, work, the family and nation-state” (Priestly 2003: 116). As well, capitalism broke down pre-existing systems of solidarity and with this change there was a loss of independence for disable individuals and the creation of dependence due to the current culture. “ There is unlikely to be any form of progress towards independence until there is a cultural shift in accepting that disabled people can and should be [considered independent and self-sufficient]” (Priestly 2003: 138).
Independence may conjure various meanings depending on the individual. In the eyes of disabled people, independence is about rights, access and control. For example, giving a disabled person access to adequate education would allow for proper education, resulting in a respectable job which leads to self sufficient financial support. Instead as mentioned in Wilton’s article, disabled individuals are excluded in the educational system which places them at an obvious disadvantage. Similarly mentioned in Priestley’s book, disabled people, women in particular, continue to be subjected to unequal access to education. With this lack of education, there is a struggle to achieve integration into ordinary employment and suffice it to say with the exclusion from labour comes the challenge of attaining independence.
With regards to employment, as all three articles mention, people with disabilities tend to be poorly represented in formal employment. The employment opportunities for disabled people are very scarce and offer low wages, fewer hours and less job security. Additionally, disabled individuals are concentrated in a small number of occupations, are less likely to occupy visible positions involving contact with customers and there is few opportunities for promotions or advancements. Move over, many workplaces remain inaccessible and the quality of training for disabled individuals is poor. As it is evident, lack or absence of paid employment is a primary reason for continued dependency and high poverty rates.
With the rapid economic change, there is an increase in new opportunities. As mentioned in all three articles, disabled people are now more likely to achieve independence through assistive technologies and self management of personal assistance. The current advancement in “new technology would facilitate the economic liberation of disable people” (Wilton 2006: 132) and help return them to an approximation of normalcy. However, even with the progression of technology, there are many other factors restricting disabled people such as cultural attitudes and behaviours of society.
Although all three readings are similar, they are also posses several differences. Colin Goble focuses on institutionalization and medicalization of disabled individuals. Within the institutions, disabled individuals were taught that they were ill, helpless, inferior, and are dependent, thus causing many disable individuals to believe disability to be a tragedy. Goble mentioned that the role of professional support personal alleviated the effects of functional defects faced by disabled people in order to help them achieve greater normalcy and personal function of independence. There is great pressure placed on disabled people to be grateful for caring and attention devoted to them from busy, considerate professionals, yet no one in modern industrial society is completely independent, we as human beings live in a state of mutual interdependency. The “human condition is ultimately one of interdependence between people” (Priestly 2003: 122). Partnership is a key requirement; therefore tasks and opportunities are achieved by people working together, not solely in isolation.
Next, Priestly’s chapter five focuses on parenthood whereas the other two readings excluded the issue altogether. Priestly believes in the notion that parenting signifies adult status, yet disabled people are obstructed in their claims to parental rights and responsibilities. Many impaired groups have been categorized as unfit and inadequate for parenting because they are not viewed to some extent as “physically healthy, expectation of a long life span, be financially self-sufficient, appear normal, and be able to carry out physical and domestic tasks of caring for children unaided”(Priestly 2003: 127). Blame for parental failure is placed on individuals and their impairment, not society, culture or the environment. It is depressing that literature compares disabled parents to psychiatrist survivors or parents with drug and alcohol related backgrounds. Disabled individuals are equal to able body people and should have equal rights to parenting. Disabled individuals discover and implement ways to deal and cope with their disabilities so they can be the best possible parents. In reality, disabled people can be better parents than able body individuals because they know first hand how it feels to be stigmatized and excluded therefore they are able to offer specific support, attention and love that a normal person may be unable to offer.
The final reading by Wilton focuses on gender differences within employment opportunities. Wilton believes there is a disproportionate concentration of men and women with disabilities in various occupations. Disabled women work fewer hours than disabled men even with the lack of employment. “Gendered division of employment is still clearly visible in the differential rates of both full- and part- time work, which means men on average are significantly better off materially” (Wilton 2006: 146). Although, there is a narrower wage gap between disabled individuals in relation to able body society. This may be apparent because disabled people tend to be centralized around similar occupations such as service work and unskilled manufacturing work. In short, both disabled men and women are at a disadvantage when it comes to employment opportunities. “Disabled people have been excluded from participation in adult labour, so they have been excluded from full adult rights and citizenship” (Priestly 2003: 119). Many employers remain reluctant to hire disabled people and even if given a chance they are less likely to have full time work because part time work is a way for a company to decrease costs, and employers also do not have to pay for benefits and incentive packages.
What can be learned from this week’s readings is there are many definitions for independence. What an able body person perceives the definition to be may differ from that of a disabled person. Since disability and adulthood have been socially produced it is up to society as a whole to ensure people with impairments are given the opportunity to voice their opinions and concerns and are granted respect in all sectors of life including education, employment and independent living. For this notion to happen, society in general must accept conditions of individuality and selfhood to be altered or eliminated, not the disabled people themselves.

3 comments:

Arla said...

I really enjoyed reading this comment paper. Something that stuck out while reading this paper was when you talked about that with the help of able-bodied individuals and institutions disable individuals would somewhat live a 'normal life.' The reason this stuck out was that society views independence as normal and therefore one would need to be independent in order to live a normal life. Independence is not something that disabled people experience even with help. There may be some things that disabled people could do with help that they may not be able to do on their own, but are they fully independent. I don't feel that society would see this as living a normal life or even a somewhat normal life. However, I feel that if disabled people are able to do things that they wish to do regardless if they have help or not, that they are living LIFE!!

Tracy A said...

Your paper was interesting to read and I think it ties to majority of the issues we have been discussing in class. The culture we live in only see people as valuable if they are on the producing to the society. That is to say, in our capitalist society, one needs a job. But then, when we look at most comapnies they are unwillingly to prove disabled people with jobs because of the stereotypes involved. Also, if disabled people are not provided with jobs, it is very hard for them to be independent. Our society is enforcign independence on everyone and yet, it is not giving everyone the access to have the needs to independence.
Tracy A.

LesleyC said...

I enjoyed this comment paper and also the discussion we had in class. TracyA makes a lot of imprtant points i would like to elaborate on in her comment. Independence is a very broad word, but society tends to define it with a very closed mind. Independence can be defined differently by everyone on this earth, no matter age, gender, religion,physical abilities etc. For example; independence to a infant is being able to sleep a whole night without being rocked in the rocking chair, or for a 5 year old to be able to play with her dolls alone in her room while her mom handles some house work, for me it is the ability to live on my own and do my own laundry - yet i still rely on my parents for financial support! I have a friend who is socially independent, she does not like going to parties and social events but would rather watch a movie by herself, however she cannot be away from her mother so in that sense she is dependent on her mom but independent in terms of social need. SO what I am trying to say here is that in the disabled community, like expressed in the articles and ashley's comment paper is - independence is whatever they - as indivudals (not as a group) think it to be. I guess I am trying to say independence is socially constructed. There is no such word as indepdence for a group of people, it is individualized pertaining to the persons life and what they encounter and deal with on an everyday basis.