Networking Forum

From where we were in the mid 70s when dealing with disabilities we've some way but not a lot. People may champion disabled people in shows like Dancing with the Stars and the various actors mentioned in the article, but when it comes to actually hiring people with disabilities, it's a different story. The employment rate for those with disabilities in the US and Canada has remained about the same 70 per cent unemployed or underemployed for the last 30 years or so.

In Canada the public broadcasters are running a commerical showing different disabled persons in real jobs, and saying we're all able, open your minds to hiring disabled persons. It's been running for about two months. The Canadian National Institute for the Bind has been running public service commercials breaking some of the myths about blindness and trying to reshape attitudes. Who knows if it will help, it can't hurt.

I think like any civil rights movement there are gains but then there are losses as well and it does take time , although I must say my patience is wearing thin. It seems about every 7 years or so we have to reinvent the wheel, with every new generation.

However, I also think there is a hierarchy within disabilities , those that are the most 'acceptable' and least frightening get jobs or those who have the greatest number of lobbyists get the attention.

I think it is time that disable persons everywhere speak with "one voice" rather than guarding our specific turfs with agencies as such. Our stories, despite having different disabilites are the same as are our experiences.

Maybe if we do start to see disabled persons personified in the media as real people and not someone to be pittied or the crazed killer, employers and society will begin to think of our skills and abilities , rather than our disabilities.

Throughout history, blindness and negative perceptions of the blind were projected on the public, by the blind.

By the 1950's, most all the states had state agencies for the blind. Training centers and a broad array of public and private organizations were becoming productive in advancing the welfare of blind persons.

During my lifetime I have personally and professionally witnessed the slow changes.

Not many years ago it was most difficult to get blind individuals to even say the word, blind. Convincing a blind individual to accept a white cane and learn the use and value of it was like getting them to handle rattle snakes.

Over time youth and newly blinded individuals seem to much more readily accept their condition and even look forward to training and preparation for living as a capable, normally adjusted citizen and have lost that awful fear that formerly existed.

As the blind themselves have accepted and adjusted to their situation and have gained confidence and positive attitudes, the public naturally also views the Blind in a more positive way.

Current day employers are not institutionally fearful of blind applicants, or as employees.

Blindness is not the over riding issue in today's, labor market. Fitting into the community and a labor force as a mature and an adjusted person are essential. Employment always is a matter of possessing the mandatory work attitudes, skills and abilities, adequate to the particular job in question.

When an Individual has met all the required prerequisites for any particular Job, then the natural outcome of these personal endeavors, must be employment.

I'm a sixty year old grandmother of two with a master's degree and a professional demeanor that exudes competence. So, then, why should it be that seemingly equally educated and supposedly equally competent colleagues ask me if I can handle the stairs during fire drills in our building? Or why should it be that the manager of said building tels my colleagues, in my presence, that he doesn't feel comfortable when watchin "her" come down the stairs? Or, why should it be that when I go to lunch with another group of friends, whom I don't know well yet, they want to know if I can handle a buffet? I've recently come to believe that such questions represent a failure of imagination, reflecting the inability/unwillingness? of many well-intentioned folks to take that risk and "walk a mile in my shoes." No, I'm afraid we're not there yet. In addition, I fear that we have to mount a continuous educational campaign to address the fears and the ignorance that manifest anew in each succeeding generation. However, this does not mean that the struggle is not entirely worthwhile, because it is!

I know that for me I am a professional singer who happens to have MS. I am unable to find a band willing to deal with that fact that I can no longer memorize words to songs and it has really put a dent in my career. I am pushing to find funding for a national tv show that showcases people with talent who happen to have a disability. The world still does not see that despite our incapabilities we are still vibrant and talented people.

Two things just recently reminded me that we may have a long way to go yet in gaining a public understanding in the U.S. about disability.

First, on ABC’s Sunday TV talk shows, right after the Virginia Tech shootings, columnist George Will said he felt sorry for college and university administrators because they are forced under the ADA to accept as students individuals “who shouldn’t be allowed on our college campuses.”

As a personal with a very visible disability, that gave me willies. I can’t imagine how I would feel if I had a hidden disability.

Second, last night (again on ABC-TV), I watched Clint Eastwood’s “Million Dollar Baby” for the second time, I know, one of the underlying themes of the film is that, to survive in boxing, you need to react directly opposite of your instincts. The film may have depicted boxing accurately but certainly not some of the hospital scenes after Maggie (Hilary Swank) became completely paralyzed.

Most of us have the instinct to survive, to live, to make the best of our circumstances – to see how far we can go. But, Maggie (Hilary Swank) decided the high point in her life was being in the limelight as a winning boxer and that each day with her disability diminished her own sense of self-worth.

To me, the film reinforces our society’s value for athleticism – and the belief that life with a disability (especially if it’s severe) is not worth living.

I keep wondering whether Clint has a stronger-than-usual hang up about disability, given his movie themes and ADA non-compliance with his restaurant business. If that’s the case, it’s a serious vulnerability on his part – especially because he’s so influential in shaping (or reinforcing) public perception.

Jim

There is a trerrifying concept, in today's streamlined, pseudo-progressive societal mindset, that people with disabilities should live perpetually under a glass ceiling and, even more startling, that we should be grateful for it. As a blind college student, this is viscerally hateful to me. People seem to say that the education, intellect, and emotions of a person with a disability are not only substandard, but unwanted. At every turn, silence says, "You may try all you like. It's rather charming to see you try to be scholarly and fulfilled like us." There is an assumption that we must, everyone one of us, want to be able-bodied, that we make Camus' great decision every day solely out of a warped existential martyrdom, because life with a disability can't possibly be worth all the trouble. Well, it is. I, for one, treasure my gift of blindness with all my heart, and the risks and pitfalls have only served to make me more adventurous. Can some people really believe that the human spirit is that easily torn down? Thank you to groups like Theatre by the Blind for taking some crucial steps toward reclamation of a seemingly lost creative passion which the oppressors of this world (both able-bodied and otherwise) just cannot seem to stamp out.