About Photos

/
Color photo of an antique camera
Arabelle Sicardi, BuzzFeed - January 11, 2015

Karolyn Gehrig’s #hospitalglam photo collection

I haven’t posted interesting disability-themed photos in quite awhile. Partly it’s because my initial enthusiasm for them has faded a bit. Related to that, I’ve started to realize that cool photos of disabled people usually don’t say as much as they seem to when you start paying attention to them. Once you get used to the idea that disabled people look hip and badass, it becomes sort of obvious and thus less remarkable. This is a good thing.

I am sharing links to Karyln Gehrig’s #hospitalglam collection because the photos are so beautiful and interesting, both in the context of disability and chronic illness, and in general as creative photography. Do click through and enjoy!
———————

Newbie FAQs: Accessibility

/
FAQs spelled out in 3-D blue letters with a computer mouse in front
Why are so many buildings still not handicap accessible? Isn’t that against the law?

 This is a very good question!

Most US states* have building codes that include standards for accessibility, including:

- Minimum width for exterior and interior doors

- Measurements for building safe, usable ramps

- Proper height and placement of toilets, sinks, stalls, etc. in public restrooms

- Proper height of tables and service counters

- Minimum width of aisles and pathways inside buildings

Most accessibility standards are designed to make spaces accessible to people using wheelchairs. However, there are also provisions for people using other mobility aids, like crutches and walkers, blind people, and deaf people. The idea is that the default design of all public spaces should be usable by the maximum number of people, including those with disabilities. By building in accessibility as a standard practice, there is less need for more expensive retro-fitting and / or inadequate second or third choice ways of providing service to disabled people.

Accessibility standards are part of building codes, alongside structural standards, fire safety, and all the other basic standards for construction we generally take for granted. They are not options. They are as binding as any other component of building codes.

In addition to state codes, there are the ADA Standards for Accessible Design, which are designed to ensure that accessibility standards have some uniformity everywhere in the United States. By and large, if you design accessibility features according to these standards, you will be in good shape.

So, why are so many buildings still inaccessible?

First of all, accessibility standards have the most effect on brand-new buildings, and to a somewhat lesser extent renovations of existing buildings. They have much less power to force specific accessibility improvements in existing buildings not undergoing any other renovations. That said, under the ADA, businesses are required to make any needed accessibility improvements that are “readily achievable” … that is, feasible and inexpensive. This helps, but it leaves a lot of room for interpretation as to what any given business must do in their particular situation.

Second, failing to comply with accessibility standards isn’t “illegal” in the same way that speeding and robbery are. For the most part, accessibility is enforced through complaints, lawsuits, and, in really egregious cases, intervention by government agencies like state human rights commissions or the US Justice Department. You can’t call your local police to ticket an inaccessible bookstore, and even building inspectors vary widely in how much priority they put on enforcing accessibility standards.

Third, it is, in fact, usually harder and more expensive to make older and older-style buildings accessible than it is to build in accessibility form the ground up. “Old downtown” buildings from the 19th and early 20th centuries generally have narrower doorways, steps at entrances, and less roomy interiors than are standard in new buildings today. They also tend to sit on much smaller pieces of property, with less room for ramps and additions. Because these are “pre-existing” buildings, they are generally only improved when renovated, and then only marginally. Unfortunately, this means that older downtown areas are often less hospitable to disabled people than newer buildings out in the suburban “sprawl”. Yet, many lower-income disabled people live downtown, and don’t have cars or good transportation to get to the more accessible supermarkets and strip malls.

Finally, there is another factor that is powerful, but harder to quantify and define … apathy. Accessibility is still so low on peoples’ list of priorities for social and civic change that it rarely gets much attention at all. There are still business owners and managers who claim, often quite honestly, to not understand their obligations under the ADA, almost 25 years after the law was first passed. Whether this lack of profile is because people don’t care, because they are ignorant of what they can do to improve, or because disabled people aren’t organized enough in their advocacy … it’s hard to say. It’s probably a combination of all three.

There are many strategies we can all use to make accessibility a higher priority. Personally, I think the greatest long term potential lies in consumer recording of accessibility features, and lack thereof, using web-based mapping and business rating sites like AXS Map and AbleRoad. Businesses with poor accessibility need to know that they lose customers as long as they fail to act. That includes not just disabled people themselves, but also, hopefully, their families and friends.

 One way or another, more of us have to speak up when we see barriers that shouldn't be there.

* Many, if not most countries also have similar accessibility standards applied locally or nationally … also with varying levels of thoroughness.

Disability.TV - Ep. 18 - Top 5

/
Disability.TV podcast logo
In which I count down the Top 5 Disability on TV Happenings of 2014. Not necessarily the best … just the most consequential.

5. Red Band Society
4. Cancellations
3. Asperger’s on Parenthood
2. Tyrion’s jail cell conversations on Game Of Thrones
1. American Horror Story: Freak Show



 Videos sampled in the podcast:


Don't forget to take the Disability.TV Podcast Survey at SurveyMonkey.com. Vote for the TV shows and topics you'd like me to cover in 2015!

Subscribe:


Comment:

The Coming Debate Over Disability

/
Max Ehrenfreund, Washington Post Wonkblog - January 7, 2015

Funding for the Social Security Disability fund may be the next big political issue facing the disabled community. If so, this Wonkblog article is a great place to start, as we prepare to counter a wave of vague but heated fraud accusations, and divide and conquer rhetoric. Those of us with the more on-the-nose, obvious disabilities will be told that we are not the targets, it’s those lazy, cheating slobs with heart conditions (snort), breathing problems (scoff), back pain (guffaw), and anxiety disorders (raspberry) who are gaming the system.

We need to be on guard against these arguments, because they are wrong. And, while some people talking about widespread cheating and abuse of Disability certainly believe it, I’ll go out on a limb and suggest that a significant number of ideologues know it’s largely bullshit.

We will need to remember that there has always been a core minority of people who think that government support benefits like Social Security are bad … not badly managed, not at risk from cheaters, not too expensive … but BAD, even when done properly. They think the government shouldn’t be involved in supporting individuals at all. They think that it’s bad for poor people to be given money for no work. They think it’s bad for the our moral character. They think it leads people to think that society owes them a living. They believe that two or three generations of social welfare programs have resulted in a lazy, weak, entitled citizenry.

It might be an intriguing discussion for cocktail parties, but we are a step closer now to ideas like this being put into policy. Something like this has already been happening for a few years over in the United Kingdom, with pretty ugly results, built largely on anecdotal newspaper reports of a few disability “scroungers”.

We will need to watch out for the next year or two, is all I’m saying.
———————

Newbie FAQs: "Disabled"

/
FAQs spelled out in 3-D blue letters with a computer mouse in front
Why do you call yourself “disabled"? Isn’t that a negative term?

 This is well covered territory. If you frequent disability blogs, everyone has at least one and probably more posts about disability terminology, including me. Since this FAQ thing is meant for beginners to Disability Culture, I will try to be brief and keep the explanation simple. I will also try to emphasize my own, personal reasons for preferring “disabled”.

I prefer “disabled” because it is short, just “negative” enough to acknowledge that having disabilities isn’t a picnic, but has enough broad un-conflicted acceptance among actual disabled people that despite what the word seems to say, it really is just a convenient label now. Most of us don't hear it as an assessment of our potential as human beings.

The other reason I prefer "Disabled" is that the main alternatives are loathsome to me:

“Special needs” reminds me too much of Al Franken's Stewart Smalley skits on Saturday Night Live … “Isn’t that special?" It is also a term that is overwhelmingly championed by parents and professionals, and not by disabled people themselves.

“Differently-abled” goes too far in trying to assert that disability is no big deal. It is a big deal ... or at least it's a deal. It isn’t the biggest deal, but it has bigger implications than, say, hair color, artistic talent, or math aptitude.

“Challenged”, (physically or mentally), strikes me as too much of a conscious effort to turn disability into some sort of moral quality. It suggests that the barriers we face make us noble. Frankly, I'd rather try to get rid of the barriers than take a bow for facing them. Also, like “Differently-abled” and “Special needs”, it is a euphemism, an effort to make something good out of something really bad. It’s like saying “Number two” or “Bowel movement” instead of “Poop” or “Shit”. Disability ain’t always easy, but it’s not Shit.

“Handicapped” is just too old. To me, it’s the disability equivalent of calling a black person “colored”. It says more about the user than the people it refers to.

And now, a brief digression about “people first” language:

I used “person with a disability” for much longer than I have used “disabled person”. I still, personally, think it is a socially acceptable and appropriate term for people who have a certain kind of relationship with their disabilities. For some people, it really does make sense to think of their disability as something they have, rather than an integral part of who they are. However, I also think there are others who just don’t feel quite right separating their disabilities from themselves. My disability is woven into just about every aspect of my life. It doesn’t make sense for me to think of my disability as an isolated attribute … like a “thing” that I “have”. So, to me, both “disabled person” and “person with a disability” are fine, and I don’t have too much of an issue with people with disabilities who choose “person with a disability”.

I guess it’s hard to be brief about this. But the underlying principle is simple. Don’t try to run away from what disability is by coming up with fancy, euphemistic things to call it.

 As always, I welcome comments!

———————

Motivation

/
What is the premise behind “motivational speaking”? I ask because I see a lot of disabled people online who identify themselves, in part, as a “Motivational Speaker”.

I have a basic idea of what that might mean in practice. I picture a disabled person who speaks to groups about living with a disability, in a positive way, in order to energize their audience into making their own lives better. But that would seem to presume certain things, that are often unstated.

Is it that disabled people who are happy and successful have some universal secrets of happiness and success that others crave?

Is it that tons of people of all kinds live lackluster, messed-up, sad and unproductive lives that need some sort of attitudinal improvement?

I feel like there may be some truth in both of these ideas. However, I also get the sense that it’s a mistake to accept the truth of these premises wholesale, without critical thought. I certainly don’t believe that disability automatically brings great insights into how to live. Nor do I subscribe to the rather popular notion that vast swathes of modern humanity have somehow forgotten to live.
———————

Work In Progress - Disability Simulations

/
After exchanging Facebook comments on the latest dubious example of raising “disability awareness” through disability simulations, I’ve started working on a post about alternatives to disability simulations. If we want people to stop these “wheelchair for a day” type events, which are almost always well-intended, what can we suggest instead? Any ideas?

Here are a couple of good blog posts on the subject:

Emily Ladau, Huffington Post - March 11, 2014

Jeffrey Preston - September 1, 2014
———————

"Friends"

/
"Friends" TV show poster
Annnnd … adding “Friends” to the list of potential shows to discuss on the Disability.TV Podcast.

So far it’s pretty bad about disability when it’s used for random joking purposes. And if you count fat-shaming it’s awful. However, it's not too bad when it very occasional deals with disability head-on. Remember the one where Sherilyn Fenn played an amputee dating Chandler?

It wasn’t exactly groundbreaking, but I like how she confronts Chandler, asking him flat out if her prosthetic botheres him, “Because I don’t like wasting my time”.

———————

Newbie FAQs: Introduction

/
FAQs spelled out in 3-D blue letters with a computer mouse in front
There’s this line of thought within Disability Culture, which says that one of the oppressions we experience is the expectation that it's always our responsibility to "educate" non disabled people ... that our first response to offensive, annoying comments or actual discrimination should always have the tone of a patient, caring teacher. How can a non-disabled person with no personal connection to disability know the right thing to do if we don’t tell them?

There are good reasons why so many of us see this as another form of oppression.

First of all, the response, “Teach me! I need to learn!” usually comes from the source of some painful encounter with ableism. Second, more often than not, the person saying this should actually know better. For example, any business owner who claims ignorance of the ADA, which will be 25 years old this July, is either grossly lazy or lying. Also, it really shouldn't take much in the way of social science or diversity training to realize customers with disabilities should be spoken to directly, not through the non-disabled person who is with them. Third ... and in all honesty this is probably the most common reason ... we just get tired of explaining the same things to people over and over again, year after year, decade after decade.

We are tired of constantly having to answer those same “Frequently Asked Questions”.

On the other hand, there is some merit in the old saying, “If you want something done right, better to do it yourself.” As sick as we are of being everyone’s unpaid disability sensitivity trainer, do we really trust others to do it for us?

As for the questions themselves, are they really things everyone should just know, instinctively? Or, are we expecting too much to come naturally to people, at least in regard to disability “awareness”?

If only there was some sort of network or communication tool we could use to answer these questions once and people could just read them. Wait a minute …

Let’s start with the questions. Here are some of the questions I hear most often from non-disabled people … and a few with disabilities, too. (Note: I will try to phrase these questions as I have heard them, sometimes using terminology I wouldn’t normally use myself).
Why do you call yourself “disabled"? Isn’t that a negative term?
Why are so many businesses and buildings still not handicap accessible? Isn’t that against the law?
What's wrong with being “inspirational”?
What’s wrong with special schools, group homes, and day care programs for the disabled?
Isn’t it unrealistic to close sheltered workshops? Most of those people will never be able to get a real job. In a workshop they’re at least busy, socializing, and making a bit of money. 
Isn’t it okay, if someone’s really severely disabled, for them to decide they don’t want to live anymore? Isn’t it all about dignity and choice?
How can it be better to place special needs kids in regular classrooms, where there’s no way they can keep up and the teachers have a hard enough time teaching all the normal kids? 
Isn’t there a lot of abuse of the term “disabled” these days?  I mean, parents getting their kids labeled so they can collect SSI, and unemployed adults getting their doctors to declare them disabled so they can collect Disability. This is a big problem for real disabled people, right?
Just between you and me, it’s different with mentally challenged people, isn’t it? I mean, they can’t be independent like you, can they? 
I broke my leg skiing last year. I had a cast for three months and had to go around on crutches. So I know what it’s like to be disabled.
If we really want city councilors to understand accessibility problems, why don't we make them spend a day in a wheelchair? That would teach them!
Over the next several weeks, I’ll try to answer each of these FAQs. I would love to see other, similar questions that you hear a lot from people who are “disability newbies”. I invite you to post them in the comments below!