[nabs-l] "Blindness" vs. "Disability" a philosophical question?

[Jedi]

Mark,

I totally agree except I'm not a fan of the word "impairment" in this 
context since "impairment" has been used to subjegate the blind through 
professional jargain, especially by way of delegating different roles 
to some of us with some sight and to others with none. I also note that 
"impairment" denotes "worse." I think of blindness more as a 
characteristic outside of the norm rather than an impairment.. that's 
just me though. Other than that, I agree whole-heartedly with what you 
have to say as I'm a student of disability studies. Though the aDA was 
meant to open social opportunities to disabled persons, the term itself 
is largely defined by the medical model.


Original message:
> An interesting question, and I'm going to throw out an opinion with which, I
> suspect, quite a few will disagree at first, but maybe I can persuade some
> of you.

> Blindness is not a disability.  It is an impairment.  The distinction
> between impairments and disabilities goes back nearly 40 years and is
> well-entrenched in the field of disability studies.  It was even codified in
> the World Health Organizations International Classification of Impairments,
> Disabilities, and Handicaps.

> In short, an impairment is a physical descriptor of the body.  Any trait or
> characteristic that lands near the outer edges of the bell curve could be
> construed as an impairment.  But impairments are essentially meaningless
> until you situate them in a social context, and in certain social contexts,
> impairments can become disabling.  In other words, disabilities are imposed
> on impairments by certain social arrangements.

> Let me give you an example.  I live on the fifteenth floor of my building.
> The building of course has an elevator, but when it stops working, many
> people who are not normally defined as disabled become more disabled than me
> with respect to my building.  I often voluntarily walk up the fifteen
> flights, but many who are use to taking the elevator would find this
> difficult or impossible, and would become disabled at least with respect to
> my building.  This is rarely a problem though because we put elevators in
> tall buildings, but what if we also put ramps, automatic door openers,
> accessible washrooms, etc in all our buildings too? Then many people in
> wheelchairs would no longer be disabled, as their impairments would not
> significantly impact on their lives.

> I am certainly disabled, but not by my blindness, by social arrangements,
> lack of adequate blindness training in Canada, quiet automobiles that make
> travel dangerous, discrimination, and the list goes on and on.  All of these
> things, however, are social factors that are imposed on my blindness.  My
> blindness is essentially neutral, and I think this is what Jernigan had in
> mind when calling blindness a characteristic, though it's been a while since
> I read his work.

> I realize that this is not how disability is defined in the ADA, but that's
> because the people who defined disability in the ADA screwed up.  They
> didn't go far enough in recognizing the social construction of disability.
> But that's not surprising when you consider the one's who wrote the law were
> a bunch of lawyers and bureaucrats.  So if I have to identify as disabled in
> order to receive the supports, legal and otherwise, that are available, then
> I will, but not because I am, just because I have to, and this is yet
> another example of how social arrangements are disabling.

> I think there are some problems with what I've said above.  I only put it
> out there as a way of thinking about blindness and disability I find
> persuasive and interesting.  And in closeing, I'm going to paste a quotation
> taken from the homepage of the NFB site.  I think it tends to support the
> position I've outlined.

> The real problem of blindness is not the loss of eyesight. The real problem
> is the misunderstanding and lack of information that exist. If a blind
> person
> has proper training and opportunity, blindness can be reduced to a physical
> nuisance.

> In other words, the disabling aspect of blindness is not the lack of eye
> sight (i.e., not the impairment).  It is the misunderstanding and lack of
> information (i.e., the social forces) that exist.  If we get rid of the
> disabling social forces, blindness is no more than a physical nuisance
> (i.e., a neutral characteristic).

> Best,

> Marc

> -----Original Message-----
> From: nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org]On
> Behalf Of Antonio Guimaraes
> Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 9:57 AM
> To: National Association of Blind Students mailing list
> Subject: Re: [nabs-l] "Blindness" vs. "Disability" a philosophical
> question?


> Hello, Just wanted to quickly throw in my two scents.

> Blindness is a disability. We who are blind are not able to do certain
> things. We benefit From or fight against services for disabled students, we
> receive disability checks from the government, and we have loss of a major
> life function, sight.

> Jernigan never argued that the blind are not disabled, he argued for blind
> people not to see themselves as handicapped. There is a difference.

> I am disabled by definition, and clearly make an attempt to minimize my
> disability with the use of adapted technologies, and a positive attitude,
> but I am unequivocally disabled.

> Antonio M. Guimaraes Jr.



> _______________________________________________
> nabs-l mailing list
> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> nabs-l:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/mworkman%40ualberta.
> ca


> _______________________________________________
> nabs-l mailing list
> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for nabs-l:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/loneblindjedi%40samobile.net

-- 
REspectfully,
Jedi

Email services provided by the System Access Mobile Network.  Visit 
www.serotek.com to learn more about accessibility anywhere.