Tag Archives: law

Recommended Reading for 3 December, 2010

Gentle reader, be cautioned: comments sections on mainstream media sites tend to not be safe and we here at FWD/Forward don’t necessarily endorse all the opinions in these pieces. Let’s jump right in, shall we?

It’s Your Fault! by that stunning and mysterious being, Chally, at the Don’t DIS My ABILITY blog:

The thing is, people with a disability need accommodations. Accommodations aren’t optional extras, they aren’t something we can give up if we try a bit harder. Neither are we out to get all the money/spots/benefits at the expense of the rest of the population.

Despite his disability, he wages war on HIV (I know, horrible title) by Chaitra Devarhubli at DNA India:

[Amrut] Desai visits various villages in Gujarat, where he conducts programmes on AIDS and educates villagers regarding the same.

UK: Access All Areas: Disability survey

Some 90% of people surveyed by the BBC believe the government should provide funds to make the workplace accessible for people with disabilities.

But 40% felt disabled people turned down job offers even when they were physically capable of doing them.

Deaf moviegoers sue Cinemark theater chain at the Associated Press (US):

Kevin Knestrick, an attorney for the plaintiffs, says Cinemark Holdings Inc. is the only one of the nation’s three largest movie chains not to offer closed-captioning equipment.

Sierra Leone: Disability Bill might become an Act on Friday by Poindexter Sama at Awoko:

it will institute, upon its enactment, a Disabled Commission, provide free education and vocational training for persons with disabilities at required levels, make provision for free medical care, ensure mobility in public buildings and public transports and a host of other facilities necessary for disabilities in all forms.

Send your links to recreading[@]disabledfeminists[.]com. Let us know if/how you want to be credited.

Recommended Reading for 2 December, 2010

I am quite, quite as shocked as s.e. that it is December! Gentle reader, be cautioned: comments sections on mainstream media sites tend to not be safe and we here at FWD/Forward don’t necessarily endorse all the opinions in these pieces. Let’s jump right in, shall we?

There’s Respect, and Then There’s Respect by a rather strikingly beautiful, talented and intelligent woman by the name of Chally at the Don’t DIS My ABILITY blog:

I’ve been thinking about how “respect” for people with disabilities is often framed in negative and condescending terms. We’re only worthy of respect insofar as we play the inspirational martyr. We can be respected for struggling through what are supposedly inevitably hopeless, helpless lives. But we can’t be respected for fighting back against the systemic barriers keeping us down, or questioning our care.

Disabled want more by Fungi Kwaramba at The Zimbabwean:

The National Association for the Care of the Handicapped (NASCOH) said that 10 per cent of the country’s population live with disability. Even though there is a Disability Act the laws has not been enforced, and this has seen the continued exclusion of the disabled from mainstream activities.

UK: Spending cuts threaten disability arts festival by Helen Carter at The Guardian:

“DaDaFest is here to present the work of deaf and disabled artists, whose work is on a par with mainstream artists,” says the festival’s artistic director, Garry Robson. “Disabled and deaf people are not simply passive consumers of a tragic destiny but active participants in all areas of life, with a unique and valuable cultural perspective that we plan to share during the festival.”

Australia: Editorial: Shortfall in disability services at AdelaideNow:

While many services are stretched on days such as Christmas, it is hard to imagine an able-bodied person needing to book a taxi three months early to ensure they can enjoy lunch with family and friends. This shortage needs to be recognised.

Nearly half of Israel’s disabled forgo food, medicine, heat by Ruth Eglash at the Jerusalem Post:

According to a study by the National Commission for People with Disabilities, which was released on Monday ahead of the International Day of People with Disabilities to be marked worldwide on Friday, out of roughly 1.5 million Israelis who consider themselves disabled, 43 percent of those with severe disabilities and 29% with moderate disabilities went without food at some stage over the past year, while more than one-third of those with severe disabilities and 23% with moderate disabilities had to miss out on essential medication because they could not afford it.

Send your links to recreading[@]disabledfeminists[.]com. Let us know if/how you want to be credited.

Florida Court Ruling: Community-based Services, Not Institutionalisation

In 2007, Florida resident Michele Haddad was involved in a motorcycle accident with a drunk driver. She incurred a spinal cord injury that led to quadriplegia, and lived at home until she lost her caregiver and Medicaid informed her that she would only qualify for the services she needed if she spent 60 days in an institution. Aside from making absolutely no sense, as often seems to be the case with Medicaid bureaucracy, this barrier to accessing care was also highly discriminatory.

Haddad sued, arguing that she would suffer ‘irreparable harm‘ by being compelled to enter a nursing home, and the court agreed. The State of Florida was ordered to provide her with the community-based services she requested and was entitled to. Haddad will be getting a caregiver and staying at home, and we can chalk down another victory for disability rights. This is huge and I am really pleased by the positive outcome in this case. Haddad wanted to stay at home, she should have been allowed to stay at home, and it is heartening to read that the court ruled on the side of justice, bodily autonomy, and independence in this case.

The United States Government was also involved in the case, arguing on Haddad’s side. The Justice Department is currently fighting several discrimination cases, many of which build on the landmark Olmstead vs L. C. case that cleared the courts 11 years ago. Speaking about the Haddad case, Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, said:

In the Olmstead case, the court recognized that the unnecessary segregation of individuals with disabilities stigmatizes those individuals as unworthy of participation in community life. By supporting Ms. Haddad in this case, we seek to ensure that individuals with disabilities can receive services in the most integrated setting appropriate, where they can participate in their communities, interact with individuals who do not have disabilities, and make their own day to day choices. (source)

I’m excited to learn that the Department of Justice is cracking down on discrimination and is specifically selecting cases that will promote full integration into society for people with disabilities. As I discussed a few weeks ago, passing antidiscrimination laws and winning victories in court isn’t enough to put a stop to discrimination and ableism, or to the social attitudes that allow for the dehumanisation and abuse of people with disabilities, but these cases do make a difference, and the direct involvement of the government shows that there is a genuine desire to address disability discrimination and to fight it.

Forced institutionalisation, as almost happened to Michele Haddad, has a long and very sordid history in this country. A common problem that I encounter in discussions about it is that it is not always recognised as such. The Haddad case seems fairly clear-cut: She clearly stated that she wanted to stay at home and she was told that she would lose services if she didn’t enter an institution. That sounds forced to me, and it sounded forced to the court, and most of the people discussing the case seem to agree.

But other cases are less clear. A lot of people with disabilities are not provided with information they could use to make choices independently. They are pressured by family members or care providers. Someone in a situation similar to Haddad’s might not be aware that home care was an option. All it would take is being whisked into an institution from the time of an accident and deprived of access to information suggesting that there are alternate modes of care. We see the same thing with decisions about medical care, where people aren’t provided with information and options, but simply told what to do.

‘Forced’ is a slippery word and it is not uncommon for people who want to deny that forced institutionalisation happens to find ways to weasel out of confronting it. After all, if you don’t say the word, it’s not happening, right? This persistent denial is one of the things that makes it so difficult for us to confront the real-world consequences of ableism. If we can’t get people to talk about the fact that forced institutionalisation happens, we can’t get people to talk about why it happens and we can’t get people to fight it.

Forced institutionalisation is not the only denial of rights and autonomy to people with disabilities that people think of as a thing of the past and believe doesn’t need to be addressed, countered, or fought any more. As a result, when we attempt to have conversations about these very real, very structural, and very present issues, we meet rhetoric like ‘oh, well, that doesn’t happen anymore, right? It sure was sad when it did, though.’

Michele Haddad, and thousands of people with disabilities all over the world, can personally testify that forced institutionalisation is not a thing of the past; here in California, for example, disabled activists are currently protesting cuts to In Home Support Services, a program that is vital for people receiving home care. Those funding cuts will result in institutionalisation for people currently receiving IHSS services.

Recommended Reading for Friday, 25 June 2010

Warning: Offsite links are not safe spaces. Articles and comments in the links may contain ableist, sexist, and other -ist language and ideas of varying intensity. Opinions expressed in the articles may not reflect the opinions held by the compiler of the post and links are provided as topics of interest and exploration only. I attempt to provide extra warnings for material like extreme violence/rape; however, your triggers/issues may vary, so please read with care.

A person seated on a sidewalk holding up an orange sign reading 'no mas excusas.' A wheelchair user is seated behind the person, with only the wheelchair user's legs and feet in the frame.

Photo from a 2009 protest against California budget cuts, taken by Flickr user Steve Rhodes, Creative Commons License

Astrid at Astrid’s Journal: Empowering People with Disabilities?: About Us, Without Us

You can bet that I was somewhat sarcastic with my invitation, given the fact that people with disabilities, the very people this event aims to empower, are specifically omitted from the invitation. If you want to empower us, then let us have a voice first. Empowering people with disabilities doesn’t happen without us. I sent Jason a comment at the event page letting him know his language excludes people with disabilities. I forgot to tell him that we already have Blogging Against Disablism Day, May 1, anyway.

Rob Mortiz at Arkansas News: Disability advocacy group seeks closure of Booneville center

[A] 22-year-old man with a documented history of choking on food died after center staff failed to provide the one-on-one supervision prescribed by doctors, Dana McClain, attorney for the Disability Rights Center, said during a news conference at the state Capitol.

“The continued violation of people with developmental disabilities civil and legal rights and Arkansas’ failure to develop true alternatives to institutionalization is what bring (us) here today,” McClain said.

LoHud Editorial: ‘People’ before disabilities

New York will finally update the name of the state office charged with ensuring fair treatment and quality-of-life to people with various developmental disabilities, not just by taking the “r” word out of the title, but by adding “people” to it.

The Office of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities will now become the State Office for People with Developmental Disabilities, after votes taken last week in the state Assembly and Senate. The name change was originally introduced last year by Gov. David Paterson. Rhode Island remains the only state to have “retardation” in an agency title.

United News Media: Vietnam Enacted the First Disability Law

Recently the National Assembly of Viet Nam enacted the first comprehensive national law guaranteeing the rights of people with disabilities.  The new law mandates equal participation in society for people with disabilities through accommodation and access to health care, rehabilitation, education, employment, vocational training, cultural services, sports and entertainment, transportation, public places, and information technology.  This law is expected to have a direct impact on the growth of Viet Nam’s economy, as inclusive policies expand opportunities for Vietnamese with disabilities to be productive and achieve economic independence.

Harvard Law School: Disability rights victory in Europe won by alum with help from HPOD

In its judgment the European Court of Human Rights stated that the European Convention of Human Rights does not allow for an absolute bar on voting rights applied to anyone placed under partial guardianship irrespective of a person’s actual abilities. Even if the protocol permits restrictions to ensure that only citizens capable of assessing the consequences of their decisions and making conscious and judicious decisions should participate in public affairs, the Court found, a blanket restriction is not in compliance with the convention.

Recommended Reading for 4 June, 2010

Warning: Offsite links are not safe spaces. Articles and comments in the links may contain ableist, sexist, and other -ist language and ideas of varying intensity. Opinions expressed in the articles may not reflect the opinions held by the compiler of the post and links are provided as topics of interest and exploration only. I attempt to provide extra warnings for material like extreme violence/rape; however, your triggers/issues may vary, so please read with care.

Clyde, a blind border collie, with his assistance dog Bonnie. The two dogs are lying on the grass together.

This is Bonnie and Clyde! Clyde is a vision-impaired Border Collie and Bonnie is his assistance dog. Photo by Flickr user Lisa, licensed under Creative Commons.

Wheelchair Dancer: What Kind Of Life?

I don’t have the sense that I am kicking back slightly, leaning into life differently, because things matter less/differently now because I am disabled now, because I had a successful life beforehand. I don’t feel on a daily basis that I can let myself off the hook now because I manage to live, achieve, and make it. Disability isn’t a soft position for me. Since becoming disabled, I’ve remade my life, yes, but I have remade it in such a way that it is perhaps fuller and certainly physically harder and less comfortable (at work at least) than it ever has been. My life is more intense. Every small success means more because I have had to work harder for it than I ever had to in my previous life.

Cusp at L’Ombre de mon Ombre: Medical professionals and communication (ETA: Evidently this blog was closed after this Recommended Reading went up? If the author would like me to remove the link altogether, please email?)

Why is it then in such situations I always come to a point, no matter how much I rehearse my attitude and responses, where I feel like I’m at school and must do as I’m told: that I’m standing the in my nice grammar school uniform waiting to have whatever someone else thinks is good for me, done to or metered out to me ? I hate that feeling and hate myself for having that feeling 36 years after I have left school.

Jo Tamar at Hoyden About Town: A month of detention without review

Imagine a world in which you could be held by a government agency, against your will, for up to a month.

If you have a mental illness, that is now a real possibility.

Philip Wen at Sydney Morning Herald: Federal funds frozen for disability enterprises

Funding is regularly reviewed. The last deal was a three-year contract agreed under the Howard government, passing on an effective increase of less than 3 per cent a year. That deal expires next month.

But when the funding for next year was announced in this year’s federal budget, ADEs were in for a rude shock. The government had frozen funding, with no increase for indexation.

Shiva at Biodiverse Resistance: The fuzzy boundaries of accessibility

Both these conversations got me thinking: the first about what exactly i consider venues or events that are inaccessible to me, and whether i would expect my friends to boycott them because of that, and the second about whether it really is possible, even if desirable, to have a personal policy of boycotting all inaccessible events or venues. In both cases, the fuzzy, blurry question is – to me anyway – that of where the boundaries of the concept of “accessibility” lie.

Margery A. Beck at Associated Press: Appeals court: Union Pacific did not discriminate

She said in her lawsuit she did not know the evaluation was a mental health exam, and that Union Pacific used it to change her diagnosis and disability to a mental health condition, rather than a physical one.

Based on the mental health diagnosis, Norman’s long-term disability benefits were terminated, reinstated upon appeal, then terminated again, the lawsuit said.

Recommended Reading for Friday, 7 May 2010

Warning: Offsite links are not safe spaces. Articles and comments in the links may contain ableist, sexist, and other -ist language and ideas of varying intensity. Opinions expressed in the articles may not reflect the opinions held by the compiler of the post and links are provided as topics of interest and exploration only. I attempt to provide extra warnings for material like extreme violence/rape; however, your triggers/issues may vary, so please read with care.

Two people participating in a disability pride event. They are holding up large versions of 'hello, my name is...' stickers like those people wear to events. One's says 'hello my name is: human' and the other's says 'hello my name is: neighbor.'

Photo from the Disability Action Hall’s Eighth ‘Speak Out’ event, held in 2006. By Flickr user Grant Neufeld, Creative Commons License.

Tasha Fierce at Red Vinyl Shoes: My Kind of Crazy

I used to talk about mental health issues a lot back in the day, but haven’t lately because I got tired of feeling like a downer all the damn time. It is really important to bring mental health issues to light because the more we talk about them the less stigmatizing the diagnosis becomes, but constantly being the ambassador from crazyland is tiring mentally. You don’t always have to be the one to suffer fools.

Marianne at The Rotund: Fat and Crazy; Not Entirely Coherent, Awkward Musing On My Fat And My Crazy And How They Party Together

So, for me, one of the very hardest, most awfulest to try to overcome parts of FA was the idea that I had to listen to my body and trust that I was interpreting its messages correctly. For an example: I have a proliferation of allergies, both food and environmental. Before I pursued actual useful medical treatment (as opposed to being told the allergies would go away if I lost weight), I had no goddamn idea if I was having an allergy attack or if I had a cold. In fact, it was so impossible to tell that everything read as allergies.

Richard Bales at Workplace Prof Blog: DOL Releases Online Disability Law Advisor

The interactive, online Disability Nondiscrimination Law Advisor helps employers determine which federal disability nondiscrimination laws apply to their business or organization and their responsibilities under them.  To do this, it asks users to answer a few relevant questions and then generates a customized list of federal disability nondiscrimination laws that likely apply, along with information about employers’ responsibilities under each of them.

Diana Sweet at The Raw Story: US school for disabled forces students to wear packs that deliver massive electric shocks (warning, graphic descriptions of abuse of people with disabilities) (via Planet of the Blind)

Noting that it believes United States law fails to provide needed protections to children and adults with disabilities, MDRI calls for the immediate end to the use of electric shock and long-term restraints as a form of behavior modification or treatment and  a ban on the infliction of severe pain for so-called therapeutic purposes.

Beck Vass at the New Zealand Herald: ‘Nightmare’ at petrol station for amputee

When double-amputee Brian Portland went to buy petrol at a BP station in South Auckland, he was told he had to pump it himself.

Then, Mr Portland was told he couldn’t use his wheelchair on the forecourt because it breached health and safety regulations.

Wheelchair Dancer: Sins is Hiring

We present multidisciplinary performances (video, poetry, spoken word, music, drama, and dance) by people with disabilities for broad audiences in the San Francisco Bay Area and elsewhere; organize multidisciplinary performance workshops for community members with and without disabilities; and offer political education workshops for community based and educational organizations that share our commitment to social justice principles as a means of integrating analysis and action around disability, race, gender, and sexuality.

Yeah, what *about* your free speech “rights”?

Here at FWD, it is not unusual for us to get quite a few comments in mod that question, take issue with, or outright berate our fairly rigorous comments policy and iterations thereof in varying degrees. Many of these comments are some variation of “But what about my right to express my opinion?” or “But…free speech!”

Unsurprisingly, many of the comments that try to take us to task for “prohibiting” free speech are from non-regular (and, in some cases, first-time) commenters. I try to give people — on the internet and off — the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps these folks who try to direct the conversation to their supposed right to say whatever they want “because of the First Amendment” are just unaware that many social justice-focused blogs — especially those written by people who are members of various marginalized and/or traditionally underrepresented groups — have commenting policies, usually for very specific reasons. Perhaps they think that the First Amendment entitles them to say whatever they want without also getting called on it. Perhaps they think that bigoted or hateful speech is okay, since it’s “just” on the internet and therefore cannot be taken seriously or do any “real” damage. Perhaps they think that someone needs to pay Devil’s advocate when talking to (or about) disabled feminists and other people who do not represent (or are not represented by) the majority, and they are reasonable/intellectual enough to do the job!

Here’s the thing: This website is not  run by U.S. government or employees of the U.S. government who are representing their place of work. This is a privately-owned website.  Its contributors, commenters and readers are not all from or living in the U.S. The First Amendment applies, by and large, to the United States government’s attempts to contain and/or regulate things that people say or opinions that they want to express in myriad formats. In other words, “freedom of expression” does not automatically mean that you can bust out with some bigoted crap, and then whine or call foul when the blogger or author chooses not to publish or engage with said bigoted crap, or when someone else (perhaps another commenter) calls you on this crap. Free speech is not equivalent to some sort of magical blogular free-for-all. The “free speech!!11” defense (if you want to call it that) also has the unintentional side effect of privileging US-centric notions of being able to say certain things, apparently without consequence — something that some other countries do not appear to take so lightly (see, for example, British libel laws).

From a more anecdata-ish perspective, I have noticed that many of the people, at least on the internet, who cry “free speech!!1” in defense of their supposed right to say “un-PC” things/play Devil’s advocate/et cetera are people with various kinds of privilege (white, heterosexual, abled, cis, class–to name just a few) who simply do not seem to want to give up — or, sadly even so much as critically examine — one or more of the types of unearned privilege that they have. Put simply, they just want to shut people (who oftentimes aren’t just like them for one reason or another) up using the trump card of free speech. It seems to me that the thought process might go a little something like this: Who cares if there’s a person (or people) on the other side of that computer screen? I have the right to steamroll over their lived experiences, or tell them how wrong they are ’cause “normal” people don’t feel this way, or tell them to suck it up/grow a thicker skin, or that they’re just making things up so they can be angry about stuff, or looking for stuff to get mad about, or seeing things that “aren’t there” (because if I can’t see it, it must not be there!) or use any number of derailing tactics that are not pertinent to the actual discussion at hand, or direct the discussion to my experiences and feelings as a privileged/non-marginalized person and thus re-center my own (and the majority’s) importance in a discussion that is not even about me, because it’s within my FREE SPEECH!!1 rights to do all of this and more!

Boy, that must be really fun, getting to justify making things all about you and your “rights” all of the time in spaces that are run by people who are — gasp! — different than you, and who may not have much of a safe ‘net space anyway, since the entire web is full of people who probably share at least some of your oh-so-contrarian outlook on things (not to mention some of your privilege[s]).

The free-speechers also tend to miss one important thing: If they want to spew uninformed, privilege-encrusted opinions using this excuse, and their comment gets published publicly, it is perfectly within reason for bloggers, writers and other commenters to use their free speech “rights” to respond right back.

Barriers to justice when rapists attack women with disabilities: Australian report

[This post was originally published on October 3, 2008 at Hoyden About Town.]

*trigger warnings apply to this post: descriptions of abuse and sexual assault against women with disabilities**

“This young woman [“Caroline”] has cerebral palsy, is wheelchair bound, totally dependent on carers for her personal and daily living activities, and non-verbal. Cognitively very aware, she depends on assisted communication to enable her to communicate … Caroline was sexually assaulted by the taxi driver who picked her up from home and drove her to school …

Caroline uses a communication book to communicate, but her communication book did not have the vocabulary she needed to describe what had happened to her. Her communication book did not include words such as “penis” or “rape”, and police would not allow these words to be added after the incident, because as the police explained, in court this would be seen as leading the witness. (Excerpt from an interview with a support worker cited in Federation of Community Legal Centres, 2006, pp. 7–8).”

Suellen Murray and Anastasia Powell of the Australian Centre for the Study of Sexual Assault have just released a new report: “Sexual assault and adults with a disability enabling recognition, disclosure and a just response” [PDF].

This report starts to fill a huge gap in our knowledge of sexual violence in Australia. Although data in North America has shown that women with disabilities (WWD) are far more likely to experience sexual violence than those without, up until now there has been little or no systematic research into what is happening with WWD in Australia:

Despite being the major national data collection regarding the status and experiences of adults with a disability, the ABS Survey of Disability, Ageing and Carers, does not invite participants to report on their experiences of violence or abuse.

Similarly, the ABS (2006) Personal Safety Survey report, which specifically investigates experiences of violence, does not identify the disability status of participants, and the International Violence Against Women Survey (IVAWS) specifically excluded women with an illness or disability from the sample for the survey (Mouzos & Makkai, 2004).

Therefore, despite evidence that approximately 20% of Australian women, and 6% of men, will experience sexual violence in their lifetime (ABS, 2006), there is no standard national data collection that includes the experiences of sexual violence amongst adults with a disability, or more specifically, the experiences of women with a disability.

There is one smallish South Australian study showing that adults with intellectual disabilities are over ten times more likely to have been sexually assaulted.

Read more: Barriers to justice when rapists attack women with disabilities: Australian report