any thoughts?
"… a person is disabled by the disabling barriers of society, and not the particular circumstances of their impairment. These barriers can arise from disabling attitudes, prejudice and exclusion." (Lacton, C . 2008)
Society views any person who differs, for any reason, from the perceived norm as 'other' and somehow less than the accepted.
People that differ in their physical or mental capabilities are viewed as disabled; that it is as if being disabled is to be the other of the 'abled' and is only applicable in comparison to the 'standard'.
Disability is a social construct. Here’s an example: consider having very poor eyesight and requiring contact lenses or glasses in order to function 'normally'? Now, if those technologies had not been invented yet a person with very poor eyesight would suddenly 'become' disabled. The level of disability in people’s physical lives has to do more with the level of technology offered, rather than the level of 'wrongness' in the physical body. (Sceriha, 1996)
Assumptions are made about people with disabilities that have no bearing on reality, or their humanity. This means that they are an often forgotten demographic. This is seen clearly when it comes to problems of domestic violence and reproductive rights. The invisibility when it comes to domestic violence is seen clearly in the ABS 41020_Women's experience of partner violence_2007 study in that it does not mention women with disabilities at all, although it deals individually with a number of other subcategories, despite women with disability "being among the most disadvantaged (group) in our society and… more easily targeted for violence". (Sceriha, 1996)
This is partly because among the many misconceptions about disabled people, there is a myth that women with physical disabilities are non-sexual beings, that they are not with sexual partners and therefore are not in danger of domestic violence. (Conversely women with intellectual and psychiatric disabilities are often seen as promiscuous, with the implication that if they are victims of domestic violence that they 'deserve' what they get). These myths "…target women with disability and exacerbate their experience of abuse by getting in the way of services providing for women with disability and in the way of women with disability knowing about their rights to such provision. Worse still, when women with disability internalise these beliefs, they are not likely to have the necessary knowledge to identify the seriousness of the violence against them. All too often they believe they are to blame and may accept unquestioningly being discounted by those to whom an appeal is made for help." (Sceriha, 1996)
The general perception that a person is unhappy or deserves pity based purely on their disability is an ungrounded assumption. The idea that disabled people don't have sex is simply incorrect. This non-sexual assumption is compounded with the discrimination regarding the capabilities of disabled people as parents so that not only does this fallacy affects women with violent partners it also affects those who wish to have children.
Womens' reproductive rights are already infringed upon, the most obvious form being the illegal nature of having control of their bodies and choices. Women with disabilities face these same issues, yet, often equally intrusive is the notion that they should not have children because of their disability. The idea that a disabled person is not a 'fit' parent is based in the idea that they are not 'fit'. They are assumed to have no autonomy and therefore are not considered capable of raising a child. This view is prejudiced and ignorant. The notion that disabled people should not have children because disability limits a persons abilities to interact with the child in the 'correct' manner is discriminatory. Not everyone wants to have children, and not all people are suited to being parents. However, a person's disability should not be the factor that that 'fitness' is based on, and should not be a barrier in their wish to reproduce.
The restriction of a disabled person's right to reproduce can also be based on the fear that they might pass on their disability. This fear of disability is behind the general practice of encouraging women, in general, to abort a pregnancy if the child is likely to have a disability. Some disabled people say that they do not agree with abortion on the grounds of foetal disability. This position is understandable in that aborting purely on those grounds sends out a clear message that people with disabilities are not wanted in society.
However, in my opinion, the issue is still about having control of one's own body and life, and the choice of continuing or discontinuing a pregnancy, for whatever reason, should remain with the pregnant woman. If a women decides to continue with a pregnancy then that is her reproductive right and she should be able to make that choice free from any negative pressure. Likewise, if she chooses not to have the child her decision should be equally respected.
This issue leads into the pro-choice debate and lends support to the idea that pro-choice is not limited to the choice to have an abortion and is really about full reproductive choice. Reproductive choice is the freedom to have control over the decisions that affect your body and your life. If you wish to have a child you should be able to do so without any pressure to do otherwise and without being exposed to violence. Equally, the rights of a woman to decide not to have a child demands the right for access to contraception and legal and safe abortion options. Pro-choice is the argument that a woman, has the right to control what happens to her body.
Disabled people face discrimination everyday and their lives are often difficult, on a practical level, due to their disability and the lack of technology or support to help them interact within society. "Ignorance, neglect, superstition and fear are social factors that throughout the history of disability have isolated persons with disabilities" (United Nations 1994)
Perhaps, as we fight to remove the binary social constructions that restrict gender and sexuality expression we can help to change the perception away regarding the able/disabled binary as well.
Clara Laxton. http://www.thefword.org.uk/features/2008/04/abortion_and_di
Sceriha, M. 1996. Women with Disabilities and Domestic Violence, A paper presented to the National Domestic Violence Forum, Parliament House, Canberra, September 1996, by Madge Sceriha for Women With Disabilities Australia (WWDA). http://www.wwda.org.au/madge.htm
Linacre, S, 41020_Women's experience of partner violence_2007, Australian social trends, 2007. Australian bureau of statistics. http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/ADE8C301B6BA85ABCA25732C00207E92?opendocument
(United Nations 1994) quoted by (Sceriha, 1996)
Society views any person who differs, for any reason, from the perceived norm as 'other' and somehow less than the accepted.
People that differ in their physical or mental capabilities are viewed as disabled; that it is as if being disabled is to be the other of the 'abled' and is only applicable in comparison to the 'standard'.
Disability is a social construct. Here’s an example: consider having very poor eyesight and requiring contact lenses or glasses in order to function 'normally'? Now, if those technologies had not been invented yet a person with very poor eyesight would suddenly 'become' disabled. The level of disability in people’s physical lives has to do more with the level of technology offered, rather than the level of 'wrongness' in the physical body. (Sceriha, 1996)
Assumptions are made about people with disabilities that have no bearing on reality, or their humanity. This means that they are an often forgotten demographic. This is seen clearly when it comes to problems of domestic violence and reproductive rights. The invisibility when it comes to domestic violence is seen clearly in the ABS 41020_Women's experience of partner violence_2007 study in that it does not mention women with disabilities at all, although it deals individually with a number of other subcategories, despite women with disability "being among the most disadvantaged (group) in our society and… more easily targeted for violence". (Sceriha, 1996)
This is partly because among the many misconceptions about disabled people, there is a myth that women with physical disabilities are non-sexual beings, that they are not with sexual partners and therefore are not in danger of domestic violence. (Conversely women with intellectual and psychiatric disabilities are often seen as promiscuous, with the implication that if they are victims of domestic violence that they 'deserve' what they get). These myths "…target women with disability and exacerbate their experience of abuse by getting in the way of services providing for women with disability and in the way of women with disability knowing about their rights to such provision. Worse still, when women with disability internalise these beliefs, they are not likely to have the necessary knowledge to identify the seriousness of the violence against them. All too often they believe they are to blame and may accept unquestioningly being discounted by those to whom an appeal is made for help." (Sceriha, 1996)
The general perception that a person is unhappy or deserves pity based purely on their disability is an ungrounded assumption. The idea that disabled people don't have sex is simply incorrect. This non-sexual assumption is compounded with the discrimination regarding the capabilities of disabled people as parents so that not only does this fallacy affects women with violent partners it also affects those who wish to have children.
Womens' reproductive rights are already infringed upon, the most obvious form being the illegal nature of having control of their bodies and choices. Women with disabilities face these same issues, yet, often equally intrusive is the notion that they should not have children because of their disability. The idea that a disabled person is not a 'fit' parent is based in the idea that they are not 'fit'. They are assumed to have no autonomy and therefore are not considered capable of raising a child. This view is prejudiced and ignorant. The notion that disabled people should not have children because disability limits a persons abilities to interact with the child in the 'correct' manner is discriminatory. Not everyone wants to have children, and not all people are suited to being parents. However, a person's disability should not be the factor that that 'fitness' is based on, and should not be a barrier in their wish to reproduce.
The restriction of a disabled person's right to reproduce can also be based on the fear that they might pass on their disability. This fear of disability is behind the general practice of encouraging women, in general, to abort a pregnancy if the child is likely to have a disability. Some disabled people say that they do not agree with abortion on the grounds of foetal disability. This position is understandable in that aborting purely on those grounds sends out a clear message that people with disabilities are not wanted in society.
However, in my opinion, the issue is still about having control of one's own body and life, and the choice of continuing or discontinuing a pregnancy, for whatever reason, should remain with the pregnant woman. If a women decides to continue with a pregnancy then that is her reproductive right and she should be able to make that choice free from any negative pressure. Likewise, if she chooses not to have the child her decision should be equally respected.
This issue leads into the pro-choice debate and lends support to the idea that pro-choice is not limited to the choice to have an abortion and is really about full reproductive choice. Reproductive choice is the freedom to have control over the decisions that affect your body and your life. If you wish to have a child you should be able to do so without any pressure to do otherwise and without being exposed to violence. Equally, the rights of a woman to decide not to have a child demands the right for access to contraception and legal and safe abortion options. Pro-choice is the argument that a woman, has the right to control what happens to her body.
Disabled people face discrimination everyday and their lives are often difficult, on a practical level, due to their disability and the lack of technology or support to help them interact within society. "Ignorance, neglect, superstition and fear are social factors that throughout the history of disability have isolated persons with disabilities" (United Nations 1994)
Perhaps, as we fight to remove the binary social constructions that restrict gender and sexuality expression we can help to change the perception away regarding the able/disabled binary as well.
Clara Laxton. http://www.thefword.org.uk/features/2008/04/abortion_and_di
Sceriha, M. 1996. Women with Disabilities and Domestic Violence, A paper presented to the National Domestic Violence Forum, Parliament House, Canberra, September 1996, by Madge Sceriha for Women With Disabilities Australia (WWDA). http://www.wwda.org.au/madge.htm
Linacre, S, 41020_Women's experience of partner violence_2007, Australian social trends, 2007. Australian bureau of statistics. http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/ADE8C301B6BA85ABCA25732C00207E92?opendocument
(United Nations 1994) quoted by (Sceriha, 1996)