Sunday, July 31, 2005

Blogroll update

I've added quite a few new links to my blogroll lately. The bottom half is mostly nondisabled online feminist friends I like to keep tabs on: Who can resist the culinary wonder that is Knife-Wielding Feminists? Or information all about lizard shit from my friend Zoe?

But back to the crip stuff:

  • Edge-Centric, the new blog by Mary Johnson, editor of Ragged Edge, already has several must-read musings about the disability experience. I'm particularly happy to see her ranting a bit about the failure of popular culture and the general public (and the Supreme Court) to see disability bigotry and discrimination as a parallel experience to racism. It's a nail I've thought lately needs to be hammered at long and hard.
  • The Adventures of Gimpy Girl hasn't been updated in a couple months, but perhaps that's because the intrepid traveler who writes there is off to parts unknown. Behold beautiful pictures and commentary that make me greedy for more.
  • Blind Chance is an audio blog. There's some fascinating stuff in the archives that I plan to spend some time with, partly in hopes of keeping this blog as accessible as it can be.
  • Disability is an Art... is a new endeavor by Scott Laurent based on some crip culture statements by Neil Marcus. Marcus has said that disability is "an ingenious way to live."

Wednesday, July 27, 2005

Tennessee sit-in reaches day 38

I don't know why I haven't written about this here before. This started back in June. They've been there for the last five weeks. They spent the Fourth of July weekend locked in the Tennessee Capitol building, accompanied by a vigil outside. The governor has denied further food or water be brought in for the protestors. Still they persevere because they're fighting for their lives.

Read about it here. See the pictures. Email Governor Bredesen of Tennessee and tell him not to cut TennCare.

I can't imagine how weary and disheartened I'd be after over a month sleeping on a marble floor. Never mind -- I couldn't do it. It would endanger my health, as it no doubt does many of these determined people who fight to save their health care services, and for some, their right to live freely in their own homes.

Have you heard about this in your newspaper or on your local tv news? How about the national news? If not, why not? They've been living in the state capitol of Tennessee for 38 days.

Tuesday, July 26, 2005

Happy 15th Birthday, ADA!

From Tivka at No Pity:

I am not going to try to tell you that the ADA is perfect, that it meets all of our needs, or that it is as strong now as it was 15 years ago. I believe earnestly that unless this country fights for this law, it will die. For those of you who do not have a disability, this is also your law. If you are ever perceived as having a disability, and treated badly as a result, this law covers you. If you intend to get old before you die, this law is your protection, because anyone who lives long enough WILL develop a disability. One in six people in this country has a disability, and that number is rising. This is a good thing; this means we're living and not dying. You may feel that I am being melodramatic, but without this law, people will die. This law provides for access to health care, groceries, and basic communication. This law means that a deaf person can reach 911. It means that a woman using a wheelchair has a hope in hell of having breast or cervical cancer diagnosed in time to save her life. (We're working on that, but we at least have the legal basis for it). It means that when you're 70, you won't be confined to your house. At least ideally, that's what it means. The movement is, as always, a work in progress.
A review of a book about the ADA at Ragged Edge:

Yes, activists cheer the law -- but what they're cheering is the law that passed in 1990, and as reflected in a rich legislative history. That's not the ADA as interpreted by the courts and media, which is quite a different thing.

ADA legal scholar Ruth Colker, in her new book The Disability Pendulum: the First Decade of the Americans with Disabilities Act, gives two cheers for the ADA as written, but none for the law as interpreted by the media and the courts. Both of them, in her analysis, have given a very good law a thoroughly unfair drubbing.

Also, for more ADA coverage, Sam at Disability Law has the links.

Monday, July 25, 2005

Disability activists blast PBS for ADA anniversary promotion of 'better dead than disabled' film

This press release from Not Dead Yet:

Forest Park, IL, July 25, 2005 -- In an all-too-common feat of cultural insensitivity, PBS has chosen July 26th, the anniversary of the signing of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to air POV: The Self-Made Man. The documentary features the videotaped statements of Bob Stern, an elderly man deciding to commit suicide rather than face possible disability, medical uncertainly or complications.

"The choice of this particular air date is an affront to people with disabilities in this country," says Diane Coleman, president of Not Dead Yet, a national disability rights group based in Forest Park, IL. "It's the 15th anniversary of the signing of the ADA, a law that is, for people with disabilities, the nation's largest minority, what the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is for people of color. Not only is this being ignored by PBS, but the network is featuring and promoting a program about a person so terrified of aging and disability that he commits suicide. In terms of sensitivity to diversity issues, this puts PBS in the same league as the Fox News Channel. And, no, that is not a compliment."

Stephen Drake, research analyst for Not Dead Yet, notes that the film is a slanted portrayal of the broader issues. "Normally, we don't comment when a rich, privileged guy decides to take his own life. We didn't comment when Hunter Thompson shot himself. After all, Thompson wasn't asking for a change in the law, a permission slip, or help from anyone."

Drake says the situation is different with The Self-Made Man. "It's being promoted as a tool for adding to the public discourse in regard to assisted suicide, an issue confronting the U.S. Supreme Court and legislators in California. Whether society will treat some suicidal people differently than others is a public policy issue. The film, however, frames the issue as a dispute between religious conservatives and those who 'believe in autonomy'. "

Coleman and Drake say this ignores the fact that secular disability rights groups have been at the forefront of opposing legalization of assisted suicide. Twelve national disability groups filed an amicus brief supporting the Attorney General in the Gonzalez v. Oregon case currently before the Supreme Court.

Moreover, disability opposition is well known to the official "advisors" to the documentary. Three out of the four credited advisors to the program are long-time assisted suicide/euthanasia advocates: Paul Spiers, former board Chair of "Compassion and Choices;" Margaret Battin, advisory board member of the Death with Dignity National Center; and Dennis Kuby, former regional director (California) of the Hemlock Society. These "advisors" could have advised a truthful portrayal of the policy debate, including disability opposition. "Obviously, balance is one thing producer Susan Stern wasn't looking for," says Drake.

Saturday, July 23, 2005

Housing discrimination on the rise

This news story about a Cape Cod woman trying for the past two years to find affordable accessible housing for her family reveals numerous obstacles to avoiding utter homelessness. A dearth of accessible residences despite growing demand, fair housing accessibility exemptions for single family housing, and the complete inadequacy of Section 8 vouchers to cover actual rental costs in a competitive market create a crisis situation for disabled people in need of housing. Current attempts by political conservatives to scale back the already insufficient federal assistance of Section 8 vouchers promises this will only get worse for the poorest citizens.

Perhaps more worrisome is the discrimination accompanying these economic woes. Renters put-off by paperwork for Section 8 vouchers, fearing costly modifications or worrying about possible litigation may find ways to avoid taking on disabled tenants. Or landlords will simply refuse to make their property accessible to the disabled person looking to rent. From the Cape Cod story:

William Howell, New England program director for Fair Housing, an arm of HUD, said disability complaints are increasing faster than any other area of complaint about housing.

He said they now total about one-third of all the complaints his office receives, equal to those with a racial component. Most of that increase is due to landlords being unwilling to adapt housing to the needs of people with disabilities.

Complaints about refusals to rent have stayed the same. Howell and others say that may be due to people with disabilities hesitating to file a complaint if they think it will hinder their ultimate goal: housing.

"People are so very desperate to get housing," said Myra Berloff, the director of the Massachusetts Office on Disability, "that they will accept things other people wouldn't think of accepting and won't complain."
Complications in housing can, as you might imagine, contribute to the lack of employment of qualified disabled persons -- currently, only 42 percent of working-age men with disabilities are employed, and that number drops to 34 percent for women.* When the options of where to live are so restricted, the ability to relocate for a job becomes an obstacle to accepting employment. If accessible transportation is inadequate, commuting any distance becomes impossible too.

* The U.S. Census Bureau statistics for 2003 claim there are 37.5 million disabled people aged 5 and over in the country. Their numbers do not count "non-civilians" or people living in institutions.

News story via Rolling Rains.

Friday, July 22, 2005

Canadian interview with quad MP

This video clip of CBC reporter Rick Mercer interviewing Steven Fletcher -- first person to use a wheelchair elected to Canadian Parliament -- amuses and informs without being too cliché. Fletcher is a Conservative, a Federal MP from Winnipeg, and a high quad. The video is about four minutes long and I'm not the best typist, otherwise I'd make up a transcript for those unable to see or hear the clip. Anyone who can tell me some other method I could use to make a video like this more accessible, I'd be happy for that information.

Thursday, July 21, 2005

Supreme Court nominee John Roberts no friend to disability rights

There's no doubt most of the debate over U.S. Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr. will center on his views of abortion and Roe v. Wade, but his record on disability rights shows that Roberts brings a seriously conservative slant in his replacement of the more moderate Sandra Day O'Connor. Roberts was instrumental in Toyota v. Williams, the 2001 ADA case where he argued for the corporate defendant before the Supreme Court and specifically convinced swing voter O'Connor to support restriction of who qualifies as disabled under the ADA.

In 2001, Slate's Dahlia Lithwick presented a clear and pithy summary of the arguments before the Court, where thanks to Roberts it was concluded that the loss of a job due to severe work-related repetitive stress injury does not qualify someone for coverage under the ADA. Despite carpal tunnel syndrome and tendonitis resulting in "lumps the size of a hen's egg in [her] wrists, and [her] hands and fingers... curled up like animal claws," the Court ruled that plaintiff Ella Williams was not disabled because of Robert's legal arguments:

"She can brush her teeth, wash, bathe, do laundry and cook breakfast. She can take care of personal chores around the house. [Her wrist injury] is only a problem at work."
Thus, Williams was too disabled to do the job which impaired her, yet not impaired enough to be deemed disabled. A fuller analysis of Roberts' contribution to this undermining of the ADA and it's intentions can be found at Ragged Edge.

For a broader look at Roberts' record, see the PDF file here. For a quick and easy way to contact your senator in protest of Robert's nomination, go to NARAL. Send them money too. They do the hard work.

Thursday, July 14, 2005

Retirement community sued for denying woman right to hire personal attendant

Shortly before her 80th birthday, Blanche W. Bell, a resident of the Bishop Gadsden Retirement Community in Charleston, SC, started needing help with things like bathing and getting in and out of her wheelchair. Using her own money, she hired some personal care attendants to assist her in her apartment at Bishop Gadsden. She loves the retirement community, she says -- and wants to remain part of it.

When Bishop Gadsden officials found out about her attendants, they told Mrs. Bell that she must move into its on-campus nursing home or leave the retirement community altogether. They said their decision was based on their policies that ban long-term use of personal care attendants in their cottages and apartments. The policies, according to Charleston, SC attorney Harriet McBryde Johnson, purport to give Bishop Gadsden unilateral authority to determine where residents should be "placed."

The full story at Ragged Edge.

Update: More media coverage. (Use bugmenot.com to bypass registration.)

Sunday, July 10, 2005

London

Although I live in such an amazingly quiet and peaceful little patch of the American Midwest that the chaos of terrorism seems almost unreal, my deepest hopes are for an end to violence everywhere. Belatedly, I want to say my thoughts are with the people of London.

Wednesday, July 06, 2005

Why U.S. didn't deserve the 2012 Olympics

I expect there are numerous reasons that New York didn't win the bid for the 2012 Olympics and wasn't even really in the running. Failure to build a stadium that could house many of the primary events surely helped sour the proposal. International joy over American foreign policy no doubt also helped.

But the absolute and total failure of any United States media to provide real coverage of the Paralympic events in Athens in 2004 should have been enough to make America ineligible to host any international Olympic party. After the Olympics, the Paralympics are the largest sporting event in the world with over 4,ooo athletes from 120 countries competing in the Summer Olympics of 2004. Although the Paralympics began in 1960, they have been part of hosting the Olympics themselves since 1988 and accommodations for the Paralympics are now well-integrated into the bid process of any credible host city candidate.

Yet, while Britain's BBC provided about 1.5 hours live coverage each day of the Athens Paralympics (twice the coverage time it gave in Sydney), there was no live coverage of any event on any day from any American network. Corporate sponsorship was eventually found for a two-hour recap of the 11-day event, which was broadcast two months after everyone competing in Greece had gone home. Even that coverage was incredibly obscure:

With only days to go before the highlight show aired, the Outdoor Life Network’s Web site listed only “TBD” (to be determined) next to “Paralympics.” And that could be found only after considerable searching; nothing on the network’s home page indicated that the Paralympic recap would be airing.
If only more U.S. media had been available in Athens to cover the continuing competition. Hmmm? But of course: NBC broadcast 1,200 hours across 17 days of the Olympics. The corporation sent 3,500 employees to cover nondisabled events, including dramatic feature stories of some athletes who competed despite physical trauma and impairment -- car accidents, battles with cancer, old injuries or even current ones. These features on nondisabled athletes are used to define the competing spirit of the Olympian and create compelling narrative.

But when U.S. networks turned down the rights to air the Athens Paralympics, they cited lack of viewer interest as a primary reason. As for print media, USA Today sent one reporter with six specific story ideas and a firm resolve to ignore any other interesting story leads.

In New York's bid for the 2012 Olympics (this on page 38), the best hope for a commitment to future Paralympic coverage the city could offer was that NBC stay for the competition beginning in 2010. Apparently, NBC scheduling (and it's associated platforms of MSNBC, CNBC, Bravo, USA, Telemundo and NBC HD) is filled up with Queer Eye reruns until then. Comparatively, London needed only to mention they'd do more of the same coverage (in 2006, 2008, 2010 and 2012) to completely put us to shame. Actually, 40 other countries -- including China -- wouldn't have needed to promise anything better than their last effort to make the U.S. look bad.

All of this was noted in Greece by the rest of the world last year. If you didn't hear about it here in the United States, that's no big surprise.