As you requested, this is your ACT Self-Advocacy Resource
Network memo facilitating a national dialogue among self-advocates and
supporters and a clearinghouse for materials and training that support
self-advocacy.
.
|
.
|
| August 4, 2004 | |||||||||||||||
| Villains
and Charity Cases: The Moral View of Disability |
|||||||||||||||
|
Have you ever been called special? Or perhaps you’ve heard the line “don’t be so retarded.” These comments reflect a widespread attitude toward disability—the moral view of disability. People with this viewpoint talk about disability like it’s either some sugar-coated sweetness or it’s bad. These attitudes are a problem for self-advocates because they make it hard to be treated as a regular person.
Exercise: Carrying Labels Around
Societies have long sought to explain disability. Historically, the two most prevalent viewpoints—that disability is either a moral condition (either special or frightening) or a medical condition (a malady to be cured by experts)—have had a profound and mostly negative impact on the lives of people with disabilities. Only recently has a third view of disability emerged: that people with disabilities are regular people, a minority group with the same civil rights as others.
The moral view of disability is the false idea that people with disabilities are morally different from others. We are pre-judged as being either especially good or especially bad because we have disabilities. Under this moral view, self-advocates are not allowed to be regular people. Instead, we are labeled—as special angels, innocent and worthy of charity, or as frightening, evil and worthy of ridicule. Both moral stereotypes (good and bad) have led to problems for people with disabilities.
The idea that disability is sinful has been around for thousands of years. Like many today, ancient people thought “perfect” bodies were a sign of goodness or godliness. Logically, then, “imperfect” people were thought to be evil—it was God’s punishment for sin. Consider this passage from the Bible: “As he walked along, he saw a man blind from birth. His disciples asked him, ‘Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?’” (John 9:1-2). In the 1500s, Protestant reformer Martin Luther said that “[children with severe disabilities are]... a mass of flesh with no soul.... The Devil sits in such changelings where their souls should have been.” More recently, it has been movies, books and language that tell us “disability is bad.” Notice how often villains and monsters are made to look like people with disabilities: Goliath, Frankenstein, Dr. Strangelove, Mr. Hyde, the Mountain Troll from Harry Potter, Captain Hook. Even our language makes disability into something bad. Words that describe a disability (idiot, moron, fool, retard, blind and lame) usually end up meaning “bad.” Because they were so often considered evil and dangerous, people with disabilities have faced mistreatment. Segregation has been the rule throughout history—in homes, leper colonies, asylums, “hospitals” and large institutions. Public ridicule has been considered acceptable behavior toward people with disabilities since ancient times, from professional “fools” to freak shows. Sadly, the fear of “evil” has led to even worse problems—violence toward people with disabilities. From ancient Greece to modern America, violence toward people with disabilities has included physical abuse, neglect, abandonment, forced sterilization and even killing.
Not everyone in the ancient world thought disability was evil. There were a few who challenged this faulty belief. One of these people was Jesus (4 BC - 29 AD). He rejected the notion that disability is caused by sin. Instead, he advocated compassion and service to the powerless and outcast. The early Christian Church accepted Jesus’ call, providing services for people with disabilities. Rather than sinful, people with disabilities now came to be stereotyped in the opposite way—as “holy innocents,” special souls worthy of charity. And the charity worked two ways: It helped the people with disabilities have better lives and helped the helpers get to heaven (special helpers). This idea that “disability is special” is, of course, everywhere today. Many religious groups continue to provide “special” services to self-advocates. On a broader level, the term “special” is now practically synonymous with “disability.” |
ACT grants all memo subscribers the rights to use any and all contents of this memo with attribution as follows: Source: Advocating Change Together, Inc. Advocating Change Together (ACT) is a self-advocacy disability rights organization, started in 1979, whose goal is the advancement of self-advocacy as a civil right for persons with developmental and other disabilities. ACT has developed tools and materials that help individuals and groups promote self-advocacy in their lives and work. Call
for catalog: Copyright © 2004 Advocating Change Together. All rights reserved. |
Let’s look now at how the “disability is special” viewpoint affects people with disabilities today. Certainly, this attitude motivates many individuals and groups to provide services. Over the years, countless charity programs have emerged to address problems of abuse, neglect, abandonment, unemployment and poverty. Unfortunately, the “special” stereotype undermines self-advocacy. First, self-advocates are denied the right of personhood. We are not seen as regular people, but as special. Second, this attitude promotes segregation because special people are treated separately. Consider such often well-meaning structures as special education classes, “special” weeks at summer camps, Special Olympics, sheltered workshops and even group homes. All these programs segregate self-advocates (because of specialness). Finally, this attitude places control in the hands of others. As recipients of charity, people with disabilities have seldom been empowered to decide things for themselves. Too often, service providers have remained in control.
Although these moral viewpoints are everywhere, we can break free of their negative power. First, we need to learn to notice them in our lives. Then we can practice openly discussing these stereotypes, challenging our friends and allies to join us in exposing these harmful myths. As we work together, we can make a difference.
Understanding the Moral View of Disability: Saints, Sinners and Special People In this self-led workshop, participants explore the long history and continuing influence of this moral viewpoint. This view defines people with disabilities as morally different from others: They are either sinners or saints, frightening or innocent. For thousands of years, attitudes of the moral view have fostered segregation, ridicule and violence toward people with disabilities. Through video, role-play, art and group discussion, this workshop guides participants through a thorough examination of the moral view of disability. Exercises help create the experience of naming and overcoming this harmful view in a variety of real-life situations. Participants build skills to notice the ill effects of the moral view, talk openly about steps we can all take to work against it and move beyond moral labels and treat each person with dignity. All materials provided. Available in editions tailored for three separate audiences: self-advocates, professionals and parents. Contact Advocating Change Together by e-mail at act@selfadvocacy.org or visit our Web site at www.selfadvocacy.org and click on “Tools for Change.”
Facilitator copies the following words/phrases onto separate small sheets of paper in advance and makes one set per table.
Spread a set of these words at each table, along with some adhesive tape and blank paper for other words/phrases. Introduce the exercise. Say, “Has anyone here ever been labeled? What does it mean to be labeled?” After a few people respond, explain the exercise. “In this exercise, we’re going to look at labels and stereotypes. The moral viewpoint is the source of lots of labels—words that assign goodness or badness to persons with disabilities.” Invite participants to look over the stack of labels on their tables. Say, “Each table has a pile of common labels from the moral viewpoint. Before we do this exercise, each table should now take a minute to look at these moral labels. Have someone read them out loud. Then talk at your tables about the labels, using these questions as guidelines:
Allow five minutes for looking at the pile of labels. Ask for a volunteer who will be willing to have these labels stuck on him/her just for this exercise. (If no one wants to do it, draw a stick figure up front as your “volunteer.”) Give the volunteer a nametag that says “Regular Person.” Explain the activity. Say, “Let’s imagine that this is a self-advocate, a person with a disability. Maybe it’s one of us here. We’ll start by giving this person the label s/he wants: ‘Regular Person.’” Say, “Here comes the problem of the moral view of disability: You can’t be who you want to be. What we’re going to do is cover up our volunteer’s identity (the ‘Regular Person’ nametag) with these moral labels. Please come up one at a time and stick on a label from your table.” Have everyone take a turn saying a label out loud, coming up and using adhesive tape to stick it on the volunteer. (Note that the “Regular Person” label will become hidden by the other labels.) After the activity, move to general discussion, using the following guiding questions:
(Optional Follow-Up Activity) End on a positive note. “Now we need someone who is a strong self-advocate—someone who can be a leader for others.” Have this second volunteer come up and remove the labels. Say, “That’s what a leader does.” Now invite people to think of better words for a self-advocate. Say, “Now let’s treat this person as a regular person—how we’d like to be treated. Let’s give him/her a different message: A message of self-advocacy. What words, if any, would you like to hang on him/her instead? Just call out positive, encouraging words and phrases and we’ll write them down up here.” Have folks call out responses and have a volunteer list these on poster paper under the heading “OUR messages.” |
|
|
