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

[Haben Girma]

With that argument, everyone has characteristics that at times become 
disabling. For instance, red hair is just a characteristic. However, if 
an actress with red hair auditions for a play where the director 
expresses a wish for his characters to all have black hair, then the 
redhead is temporarily disabled. There are things she can do about it, 
though.

There's a line to be drawn. Some characteristics will place you in a 
disabled position more often than others. We could argue that red hair 
and blindness are both characteristics. However, blindness puts one in a 
disabled position far more often than red hair ever would in this 
society. Perhaps that's why red hair is just a characteristic while 
blindness is also categorized as an impairment.

Marc, you say blindness is an impairment and not a disability. Then what 
is a disability?

Haben

mworkman at ualberta.ca wrote:
> 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/habnkid%40aol.com
>