Disability and conceptions of adulthood

Priestley, Mark. (No Date). Chapter 5, Disability : A Life Course Approach. Pg. 116-142

Goble, Colin. (No Date). Dependence, Independence and Normality. Sociology of Disability Reading Package No. 19.


Disability and Conceptions of Adulthood


Up to this point in the readings, we have become very familiar with the concept of disability and its meaning. Both articles that will be reviewed in this paper will explore further into the social construction of disability to view the concept of adulthood and how it affects disabled people from achieving adult roles.
Priestley outlines the 3 main generational categories: youth, adulthood and old age. Adulthood is defined as gaining independence and the achievement of adult roles such as employment. Priestley makes an important point by stating that disabled people are regarded as “childlike” because dependency is linked to the generational categories of children or old age, and therefore do not permit people with disabilities to obtain adult status. Goble adds to this by reviewing the professional conception of independence. Although disabled people are deemed dependent, Goble points to the fact that professionals feel that if a disabled person does not measure up to normal standards, then a plan is created to return these people back to as normal as possible in order to help them gain independence, and therefore, adult status.
Although both of these articles examine the concept of independence and adulthood, both articles consider different topics on the issue. Goble discusses a basic overview of the subject, beginning with an important summary of the history of the creation of disability and independence. He also outlines very important arguments based on the professional’s and of the disabled person’s view of the conception of independence. The author finishes up with an extremely important element of the struggle for independence by people with intellectual disabilities. Priestley’s article only briefly talks about this important issue, however, Goble’s article does an excellent job in outlining the issues that people with intellectual disabilities have in order to get the same respect that other disabilities receive, let alone the respect that “normal” people have. He also challenges societies view of independence, and outlines ways in which we would be able to include those who are not able to be completely independent be respected and be able to receive adult roles and statuses.
Priestley, on the other hand, examines the concept of independence in a different light by looking at different roles associated with adulthood that limit disabled peoples access into gaining adult roles. First, he outlines the importance of employment for gaining independence, and therefore, adult status. Secondly, Priestley examines the important issue of disabled people becoming parents, and the legal issues that society has with it. Priestley also explores the issues people with intellectual disabilities face when trying to assert that they are competent and capable enough to deal with the topics that come up in parenthood. Priestley makes an excellent example, much the same as Goble’s view of aiding people in adult roles, by talking about supportive parenting. This view holds that parental competence “is not simply a fixed attribute of individuals” but something that is distributed between “people in families and social networks”(Priestley, 130). This relates to Goble’s view in that society’s view of how parenting a child should be and recognize that, since we all receive help parenting, that we should support people with disabilities in their parenting roles. If we do not, Priestley adds, parents with disabilities will continue to try and demonstrate their “potential as good enough mothers” for fear that if they ask for help that they will be seen as unfit parents and have their children taken away. This leads to parents not being able to fully support themselves and their children and, consequently, this leads to neglect on themselves or their children. This can be avoided in most cases with some parental support, and advocacy in order to defend the fact that asking for help does not make them an unfit parent.
These articles are both useful to the understanding of the subject of disability because they examine another issue on the topic of the social construction of disability. We have learned different ways in which disabled people have been discriminated against in the physical world, however, these articles examine ways in which they are discriminated against in an entity, whether it be in relation to parenthood, but also a disabled person’s right to claim generational roles. Society needs to step back and rethink what we think as “normal” ways of doing things, such as working or parenting, and see that not only are their ways right, but for the most part, so are the ways that disabled people do them. They may do something a different way than normal, but this does not mean that it is wrong. Society needs to realize that it would be more helpful if they were to nurture these differences than to knock them down, and then perhaps disabled people would be able to have the same equality as “normal” people.