More Views About Wellness in Disability
A participable society is one that is capable of being shared, accessible, accommodating, welcoming, and engaging for persons with circumstances of disability, so that they may pursue their own self determination and actualization, not unlike anyone else.
When it comes right down to it, the greatest disabler for persons with circumstances of disability is not necessarily because of their condition. Most of them find themselves being disabled because they experience a society that generally tends to be not participable for them.
There is a term that has somehow pervaded virtually all of the responses to disability needs in social models of disability in society. That term is special. It is often extended with the term persons with special needs; which in turn frequently becomes extrapolated for use in a medical context in reference to disability, and, then somehow winds its way into charitableness towards persons with circumstances of disability.
Definitions of special include:
|
1. Surpassing what is common or usual; exceptional: a special occasion;
2. Distinct among others of a kind;
3. Peculiar to a specific person or thing; particular;
4. Having a limited or specific function, application, or scope; arranged for a particular occasion or purpose;
5. Regarded with particular affection and admiration.
With every due respect to the authors and promoters of the term special, given the connotations associated with the above definitions, does this terminology not seem to them to be contrary to the very reason for its application to disability response models in the first place; ie., to foster the full inclusion of all persons irrespective of circumstances of disability. And for that matter, what happens to a person living with circumstances of disability who prefers to not have their accommodation needs labelled as special?
|
Traditional words and definitions associated with disability can be damaging to a person with circumstances of disability because of the connotations and labelling associated with disability. Moreover, they are usually premised from the standpoint of ablism. A quick reference to any dictionary for the meaning of disability and disabled soon illustrates this point. On the same token, attempts to restate and redefine terminologies associated with disability and being seen or treated as disabled can serve to attract even more negative connotations. In fact, sometimes these attempts can be more damaging than the terminology they are attempting to restate or redefine because they too themselves can soon become irrefutable labels. Isn't it therefore simply enough to say that some people are persons with circumstances of disability and leave it at that? Otherwise, attempting to restate and redefine circumstances of disability can be prone to do nothing more than validate Disablism, Disabilitism, and Disabledism.
The tendency of ablism to invoke a need for “behavior modification” of a person with circumstances of disability, or seen to be disabled, can be devastating to their wellness and dignity. Might there be a better prospect of their wellness and dignity being preserved through approaches with themes like "adaptation" or "accommodation"?
Page 1 of 3
