Autism in Minnesota Somali community

I'm spending the day with family, but here's something interesting, controversial and meaty to read "On Autism, Somalis Feels the Chill in Minnesota," from Age of Autism. It's controversial for a number of reasons, including that the site is sponsored by a pharmaceutical company and because there is much discussion of vaccines and their relation to autism. Read it for info on one of the largest Somali communities in the U.S.

And then go read up at Autism Vox about the "cluster" of autism reported above. Or read more in depth there about vaccines and how there is no evidence that they cause autism.

Slumgullion #45

Yeah, I'm still here. I got new eyeglasses this weekend, and while it may take a few days to adjust to the bifocals (!) I hope to be spending less time squinting and more time online again.

In the meantime, this is the news I'm catching up on today:

"What happens when chronically ill kids grow up?" -- A June article in the Houston Press explains the gap in health care for disabled children who come of age. It's an important topic I haven't seen covered in such depth before, but, hello... the "first large generation of chronically ill pediatric patients to reach ­adulthood"? I'll be 40 in October, and I'm really tired of hearing how all the seriously disabled children before now died before needing adult health care. We're here. We've been here. A number of us have even been blogging online for quite some time. It's just that we're mostly invisible to the mainstream media.

"Girls parents and agency face charges in starvation" -- Danieal Kelly of Philadelphia was 14. She died in 2006 and the charges have just now been filed. Mark at The 19th Floor writes about Danieal and the grand jury indictment (pdf file with one very graphic photo) of nine people for her needless suffering and death.

"Immigrants facing deportation by U.S. hospitals" -- From a NYT series on how the government and others "compel illegal immigrants to leave the United States." Here's an excerpt:

Eight years ago, Mr. Jiménez, 35, an illegal immigrant working as a gardener in Stuart, Fla., suffered devastating injuries in a car crash with a drunken Floridian. A community hospital saved his life, twice, and, after failing to find a rehabilitation center willing to accept an uninsured patient, kept him as a ward for years at a cost of $1.5 million.

What happened next set the stage for a continuing legal battle with nationwide repercussions: Mr. Jiménez was deported — not by the federal government but by the hospital, Martin Memorial. After winning a state court order that would later be declared invalid, Martin Memorial leased an air ambulance for $30,000 and “forcibly returned him to his home country,” as one hospital administrator described it. . . .

Mr. Jiménez’s benchmark case exposes a little-known but apparently widespread practice. Many American hospitals are taking it upon themselves to repatriate seriously injured or ill immigrants because they cannot find nursing homes willing to accept them without insurance. Medicaid does not cover long-term care for illegal immigrants, or for newly arrived legal immigrants, creating a quandary for hospitals, which are obligated by federal regulation to arrange post-hospital care for patients who need it.

American immigration authorities play no role in these private repatriations, carried out by ambulance, air ambulance and commercial plane. Most hospitals say that they do not conduct cross-border transfers until patients are medically stable and that they arrange to deliver them into a physician’s care in their homeland. But the hospitals are operating in a void, without governmental assistance or oversight, leaving ample room for legal and ethical transgressions on both sides of the border.

Indeed, some advocates for immigrants see these repatriations as a kind of international patient dumping, with ambulances taking patients in the wrong direction, away from first-world hospitals to less-adequate care, if any.

“Repatriation is pretty much a death sentence in some of these cases,” said Dr. Steven Larson, an expert on migrant health and an emergency room physician at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania. “I’ve seen patients bundled onto the plane and out of the country, and once that person is out of sight, he’s out of mind.”

"Taking the long way around" -- From Oceanside, California, an example of how higher gas prices and budget cuts that have led to more crowded public transit is pushing wheelchair users off the bus. We'll be hearing more stories like this, I suspect.

"Her new role is fighting old label" -- Ms. Wheelchair America is interviewed by the Houston Chronicle. Beauty contests for disabled women have been covered here before, but I do like the approach to her new job that the current Ms. Wheelchair America, Michelle Colvard, seems to be taking. She says:

They're two main ways that the media portray women who have disabilities. It's either kind of passive, needing help, victim, suffering. You hear a lot of those words, wheelchair-bound, these negative-word connotations. ... On the other hand, women with disabilities who have done pretty well for themselves are put up on a pedestal. I think sometimes that's a bad thing, too.

Pedro Guzman sues government

From the AP story:

"I will never forget what Peter looked like when he finally returned to the U.S. — exhausted and in terrible shape," said Guzman's brother, Michael. "Peter's life is forever changed by what his government did to him."

His lawsuit, which seeks unspecified damages, was filed in federal court in Los Angeles by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of Guzman.

"Not only does Peter and his mother want some vindication, they want to make sure immigration officials understand they can't do this," said attorney Jim Brosnahan, who represents Guzman. "They should have apologized and said they would take steps to make sure this doesn't happen again."

A statement released by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a branch of Homeland Security, called the incident a "one-of-a-kind case" and added more than 1 million illegal immigrants have been deported since the agency's inception.

See other posts on Guzman here and here.

Cross-posted at Alas, A Blog

Blackface/Yellowface/*face

In "Blackface/Yellowface/*face" Wheelchair Dancer muses about identity politics, performance arts and disability culture:

Despite years of discrimination and oppression and despite a history that is as appalling as the histories of other minoritized groups, there is no performing arts context for disability face. And even though exaggeration of certain physical aspects of certain impairments, there (perhaps fortunately) has not been a systematic reworking of these localized moments into a "tradition." Any attempt at disability face would look like a party costume. And that's kind of the impression I get when I see non-disabled types acting disabled roles.

So, over to you. What would disability face look like? Would you be able to distinguish disability face from disability drag? What would disability drag look like (and here I really do mean *drag,* as opposed to *dress up*). Could PWD with one impairment drag another? Could you drag your own impairment? Or would it have to be non-disabled people dragging disability? When does drag become disability face?

Could there really be a set of performances of disability in which we can separate an actor dressing up as disabled in order to create, with some degree of verisimilitude, a disabled role (because you *know* there are no disabled actors who can do this kind of stuff) from someone in disability face? Would it have to be literally a "face" to be disability face?

Other posts by Wheelchair Dancer on the intersection of race and disability include this, this, this and this.

Cross-posted at Alas, A Blog

Nobel laureate James Watson and the big liberal tent

Last month, scientist James Watson, who won the Nobel back in 1962 for his work in understanding the Double Helix structure of DNA, was busy apologizing for his remarks that Africans are less intelligent than other folks. Undercover Black Man reports this isn't even the first time this year the 79-year-old has been compelled to backpedal and apologize for offensive comments. Actually, he's got the sexism, homophobia and ableism going just as good as the racism, as noted in a Washington Post column by Michael Gerson:

In 2003, Watson spoke in favor of genetic selection to eliminate ugly women: "People say it would be terrible if we made all girls pretty. I think it would be great." In 2000, he suggested that people with darker skin have stronger libidos. In 1997, Watson contended that parents should be allowed to abort fetuses they found to be gay: "If you could find the gene which determines sexuality and a woman decides she doesn't want a homosexual child, well, let her." In the same interview, he said, "We already accept that most couples don't want a Down child. You would have to be crazy to say you wanted one, because that child has no future."

So let's just look at Watson for a moment. He's Mr. DNA. He was the head of the Human Genome Project, the mapping of our genes to determine which genes cause which traits, variations and health conditions. He's the guy who was in charge of discovering the most basic information about how human beings differ from one another. And his opinions about those differences? Africans lack intelligence, girls should be designed to be pretty, dark-skinned folk can't keep their pants zipped, and there's no problem or social loss to identifying and eliminating gay people and those with Down Syndrome before they're ever born.

These ideas Watson has about whose genes are good and whose are inherently bad are not random and unconnected. And I suspect it's also no coincidence that everything he's not (African, female, gay, developmentally disabled) falls short of being equal or worthy.

Gerson notes:

Watson is not typical of the scientific community when it comes to his extreme social application of genetics. But this controversy illustrates a temptation within science -- and a tension between some scientific views and liberalism.

The temptation is eugenics. Watson is correct that "we already accept" genetic screening and selective breeding when it comes to disabled children. About 90 percent of fetuses found to have Down syndrome are aborted in America. According to a recent study, about 40 percent of unborn children in Europe with one of 11 congenital defects don't make it to birth.

I don't know exactly how atypical Watson's beliefs are, but they're not as rare as Gerson indicates -- especially with regard to Down Syndrome and abortion. Gerson continues:

No one should underestimate the wrenching challenge of having a disabled child. But we also should not ignore the social consequences of widespread screening of children for "desirable" traits. This kind of "choice" is actually a form of absolute power of one generation over the next -- the power to forever define what is "normal," "straight" and "beautiful." And it leads inevitably to discrimination. British scientist Robert Edwards has argued, "Soon it will be a sin of parents to have a child that carries the heavy burden of genetic disease." A sin. Which leaves disabled children who escape the net of screening -- the result of parental sin -- to be born into a new form of bastardy and prejudice.

This creates an inevitable tension within liberalism. The left in America positions itself as both the defender of egalitarianism and of unrestricted science. In the last presidential election, Sen. John Kerry pledged to "tear down every wall" that inhibited medical research. But what happens when certain scientific views lead to an erosion of the ideal of equality? Yuval Levin of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, a rising academic analyst of these trends, argues: "Watson is anti-egalitarian in the extreme. Science looks at human beings in their animal aspects. As animals, we are not always equal. It is precisely in the ways we are not simply animals that we are equal. So science, left to itself, poses a serious challenge to egalitarianism."

"The left," Levin continues, "finds itself increasingly disarmed against this challenge, as it grows increasingly uncomfortable with the necessarily transcendent basis of human equality. Part of the case for egalitarianism relies on the assertion of something beyond our animal nature crudely understood, and of a standard science alone will not provide. Defending equality requires tools the left used to possess but seems to have less and less of."

Gerson apparently equates science with liberalism, and that correlation would be an interesting side debate, I suppose, though Watson certainly isn't sitting at the same progressive campfire as I am. Given his record, lets not pretend that Watson holds the liberal view of egalitarianism in any special esteem. Why does Gerson focus his criticism on liberalism? Possibly because the prejudices of the right are usually obfuscated by the anti-choice stance that does appear to accept developmental disability (and gayness and race) as part of the glorious diversity of human life, until it comes to funding things like special education or Head Start. Prejudices on the left can be seen as simple hypocrisy, something much easier to point a finger at.

Gerson says the "temptation of eugenics" involves a reductionism of individual human value into the tangible or quantifiable. While his point is an important one, and one I find especially important as a disabled feminist, he's reductionist himself in the way he shrinks the messy real-world issues of reproductive justice and choice for women into wobbly liberalism. And using Watson and his history of both scientific excellence and ideological bigotry to batter science and liberalism together is a cheap partisan strategy that fails to support the very people he criticizes Watson for devaluing.

h/t to Justice for All

On Ruben Navarro

If you read just one thing this week about disability in America, read this.

I briefly mentioned Navarro's case here but the above link has important and better detail than the news story I linked to.

Pedro Guzman found

From the AP report:

LOS ANGELES – A U.S. citizen who was wrongly deported in May was found at a border crossing over the weekend and was expected to be reunited with his family Tuesday, according to an American Civil Liberties Union spokesman.

Superior Court Judge Carlos Chung ordered Pedro Guzman's release at a hearing Tuesday morning in Lancaster. Guzman, 29, was expected to rejoin his family later in the day, according to ACLU Southern California spokesman Michael Soller.

Guzman, who lives in Lancaster, had been in Los Angeles County sheriff's custody since being detained over the weekend in Calexico, just across the border from Mexicali, Mexico.

Lawyers for Guzman told ACLU officials that the he appeared traumatized and exhausted from his nearly three months living on the streets in Mexico.

“I think he's in fairly rocky physical shape,” said Celeste Durant, a spokeswoman for the group.

Photo description: A head-and-shoulders color photo of Pedro Guzman, apparently cropped from a family photo as there is part of a torso of someone else visible standing behind him.

(Yeah, yeah, I'm still on my blogging break, but I've checked and rechecked for good news with this story for so long now, I'm excited to share it here.)

Update 8/11: Nezua at The Unapologetic Mexican writes on Guzman's tragic adventures. Also, this news story via his coverage:

[Guzman] ate out of garbage cans, bathed in rivers and was repeatedly turned away by US border agents when he tried to return to California, his family said.

Pedro Guzman, 29, was picked up at the Calexico border crossing over the weekend and released to his family yesterday.

Guzman was shaking, stuttering and appeared traumatized, his family said at a news conference. The family said it planned to seek medical attention for Guzman, who was not at the news conference.

"They took him whole, but only returned half of him to me," his mother, Maria Carbajal, said in Spanish while crying. "The government is responsible for this." The family had been searching for Guzman in Tijuana since he was deported May 11.

They said Guzman told them yesterday that he had tried to return to the United States several times but was turned away. He walked more than 160km to Calexico, the family said.

Frida Kahlo -- Celebrating the 100th anniversary of her birth

Artist Frida Kahlo was born on July 6, 1907, in Mexico City, Mexico, to a Mexican Indian and Spanish mother and Hungarian Jewish father. She died at age 47, on July 13, 1954, but she is, quite possibly, the most world-famous disabled woman living or dead. Her art is her fame, as well as her relationship with fellow Mexican artist Diego Rivera and her communist politics. Deeply personal, her art is filled with imagery of impairment and physical pain.

There are indications that in addition to childhood polio, a devastatingly injurious tram accident at age 18, and the loss of a limb in her later years, Kahlo was born with some spinal condition such as spina bifida.

Along with the paintings shown here, I've got a collection of links more interesting than anything I can write about Kahlo:

Her paintings are catalogued and described fairly well (in both English and Spanish) here, as part of an excellent site all about Kahlo, her life and her work.

This article, "The Trouble with Frida Kahlo" by Stephanie Mencimer, published in 2002 in Washington Monthly explores how Kahlo -- and all female artists -- needed to have a tragic or sensational personal story to enter the male canon. Mencimer's analysis begs for a disability studies rebuttal, particularly comments like this:

Some feminist art historians have struggled against such reworkings of women artists, but Kahlo's pop-culture mania revives it with a vengeance. Kahlo certainly facilitated this process by painting herself as the quietly suffering female. In every possible sense, the mass-culture Kahlo embodies that now-poisonous term: victimhood. She was the victim of patriarchal culture, victim of an unfaithful husband, and simply the victim of a horrific accident. But that's probably one reason why she's so popular. "People like to see women as victims," says Mary Garrard, a professor of art history at American University.

And this:

Many of her surgeries may have been unnecessary. Even Herrera notes, "If Frida's physical problems had been as grave as she made out, she would never have been able to translate them into art." Kahlo's close friend, the famous doctor Leo Eloesser, believed that she used her many surgeries to get attention from people, particularly from Rivera. There's no doubt that she was obsessed with him in a way that should make feminists cringe. She also made several suicide attempts and spent much of her adult life addicted to drugs and alcohol.

Though the article is well worth a read for it's look at how Kahlo's inability to bear children is widely interpreted as a tragedy when she may well not have seen it as such. And for when Mencimer notes this:

One wonders what the postal service was thinking when it put Kahlo on a stamp. "Visas are denied to [foreign] artists with Frida Kahlo's politics," notes Chadwick.

Here is, I think, a more developed and disability-studies-friendly analysis of Kahlo's self-portraiture. (That's a link to the main page of a Frida site. Check out the sidebar feature labeled "Frida and her obsession of self-portraits.")

For true disability studies analyses of the 2002 film Frida, starring Salma Hayek, read Marta Russell's CounterPunch review and a wonderful discussion between Harilyn Rousso and Simi Linton at DisabilityWorld. Both movie reviews note the obliteration of any depiction of Kahlo's childhood polio and it's early effects, with the tram accident framed instead as the life-altering tragedy to her physical health. Also, her recovery from that accident is made complete in the film so that a tango between Kahlo and another woman is not complicated by what would have been an interesting limp. The Rousso-Linton discussion ranges beyond the movie itself to look at use of the word "cripple," sexuality, and class and disability.

Rousso says:

Remember the scene in the garden where she's sitting in her wheelchair a few months after the accident? To me, this is the quintessential stereotype about the person who is in an accident or illness--that their main desire, preoccupation is to be able to walk again. She is sitting in the garden, her parents arrive and she gets up out of the wheelchair, takes her first steps and suddenly becomes almost nondisabled.... I found it shocking when we finally do see her using a wheelchair in an ongoing way, which is about an hour and a half into the film. We are given no sense of the progression of her disability. Until then, her disability was not shown as affecting her daily life. It was shown as affecting her painting - both her decision to paint and at least some of the content of her paintings, but not the details of her life. She was by and large portrayed as a "non-disabled disabled women." Then suddenly well into the film she is shown as quite significantly disabled.

Here's a link about Liz Crow's short experimental drama Frida Kahlo's Corset. "Corset" refers to the orthopedic back braces Kahlo wore because of her impairments.

From a 2005 exhibition, here's the Kahlo site for the Tate Modern Art Museum in London.

Finally, this PBS site on the film The Life and Times of Frida Kahlo includes five of Kahlo's works of art made into image maps with additional info available to mouse rollover.

Links lead to visual descriptions in English and Spanish: The four paintings in this post are The Broken Column (1944), Tree of Hope, Remain Strong (1946), Henry Ford Hospital (1942) and Self-Portrait with the Portrait of Doctor Farill (1951).

Thanks to Penny for the heads-up on Frida's birthday.

Poor Magazine

Leroy Moore on "Race, Disability and Justice in the Media" at Poor Magazine:

Although mainstream and, yes even some of our progressive media outlets still have a laissez-faire approach when it comes to disability, it doesn’t mean that people with disabilities are not creating newsworthy headlines. From the political arena to music studios and even in Hollywood people with disabilities are starting to play a major role in politics, music, art and much more; however the mainstream and a lot of progressive media have chosen to not cover our groundbreaking stories. And, if they do cover a story about the disabled community, they almost always use out-of-date terminology or worst talk to experts in the field about disability not to the people living with the disability. How many media outlets reported on the record amount of disabled candidates who ran for political office in last year's election or the recent police shooting of a disabled elderly woman in Atlanta?

Pedro Guzman -- Disability claim disputed

I've been checking daily for news on U.S. citizen Pedro Guzman's disappearance after police deported him in early May. There hasn't been much. Just Monday's news that government officials dispute claims that Guzman is mentally disabled:

LOS ANGELES—Government court documents released Monday question whether a man who allegedly was wrongly deported to Mexico is mentally disabled.

The documents also assert that that man, missing since being sent to Tijuana, had visited Mexico several times.

Pedro Guzman, 29, was jailed on a misdemeanor trespassing violation and then deported to Mexico on May 11 after telling immigration and sheriff's officials that he was an illegal immigrant, according to the agencies.

Guzman's relatives sued the Department of Homeland Security and the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department last week in federal court, claiming Guzman was a U.S. citizen and had been wrongfully deported and demanding that U.S. authorities help find him. The family also claimed Guzman had told sheriff's officials he was born in California.

In the lawsuit, filed June 11, the family said Guzman was mentally disabled, and was unable to read or write. But in documents filed Monday, a U.S. State Department official claimed Guzman's mother said he had no mental impediments.

"During the conversation on June 12, Mr. Guzman's mother told a Consular Assistant that Mr. Guzman is not mentally impaired in any way," Mark Leoni, chief of American Citizen Services in Tijuana, said in court filings Monday.

Guzman's brother, Michael Guzman, said he couldn't confirm or comment on the conversation his mother had with the consular officer because he had no knowledge of it. The mother was not immediately available because she was searching for her son in Tijuana.

Michael Guzman said his brother appeared normal, had a driver's license and worked in construction, but had severe processing problems.

"To the point that he's retarded? No, he's not like that," said Guzman. "But he doesn't remember things, he can't record things well in his mind."

A spokesman for American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California, which filed the case on behalf of the family, said the government assertion didn't make sense.

"Why would someone in the process of being released on house arrest agree to voluntary deportation unless he was confused about what he was signing?" said ACLU spokesman Michael Soller.

In a court filing dated June 13 but released Monday, a U.S. Immigration and Customs officer asserts the family said Pedro Guzman had been to Ensenada, Mexico, for several weekend trips and had no problems. Michael Guzman said the family had visited Mexico, but not since Pedro Guzman was 10 or 11 years old.

"But again, he doesn't remember anything, so he wouldn't know what to do," said Guzman.

Often, disability seems to be considered an all or nothing condition: Either the man is competent or he's not. Either he could communicate with perfect clarity or he was completely incapable of advocating for himself.

My own experiences mirror this perception of Guzman, though from a physically disabled perspective. The legal definition of disability under the ADA declares that a person qualifies as disabled if she has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities; has a record of such an impairment; or is regarded as having such an impairment. But the practical aspects of applying for disability financial assistance, noting you might have special needs as a juror when you receive a summons, or applying for a driver's license can require a disabled person to basically swear they are incompetent. Incapable.

It's a paradox created, in part, by the social realities of disability. Give a guy in a wheelchair the appropriate environment -- ramps, elevators, lowered countertop for cooking dinner -- and he may not behave as if impaired in any way. He may in fact not be hindered, in the same way that a higher countertop would allow a very tall person to make dinner without getting a backache. Yet the tall person would simply be considered tall and the guy in the wheelchair is thought of as disabled.

To qualify for financial aid as a disabled person, you pretty much have to say you're unable to work, when the reality for so many of us is that we are unable to get hired. Or unable to work the increasingly demanding American work hours that strain so many people's health and stamina. Or perhaps, employers are unable to afford hiring us so long as health care is inextricably linked to employment.

It's not clear exactly what happened with Pedro Guzman and the police or what his cognitive impairments might be. But it's understandable to me that he might truly be unable to have advocated for himself and avoid being deported, and still be employed and have a driver's license. He may have visited Mexico in the past and still be capable of getting very lost when dropped resourceless into that country. He may be unable to read and write and not have any "mental impediments". He may appear normal and have "severe processing problems".

If Guzman were to turn up and prove he does not have any cognitive difficulties whatsoever, it would still be a bit of a red herring as far as wrongdoing by government officials. They deported a U.S. citizen. And his mother did not help clear up confusion with her reported statement that he does not have any mental impairments of any kind. But disability is like that, not black-and-white, not either-or.

Race as disability

Back in March the story of the Andrews family of Long Island came to public attention. The NY Daily News announced "What a mess, baby: Parents say fertility clinic botched in-vitro & girl's got the wrong dad":

A Long Island woman and her husband are suing a Park Ave. fertility clinic for allegedly inseminating her with the wrong man's sperm.

After struggling to conceive their second child, Nancy Andrews and her husband, Thomas, turned to New York Medical Services for Reproductive Medicine for in-vitro fertilization treatments, according to a lawsuit.

Andrews soon became pregnant and the couple was overjoyed. They only discovered the clinic's "colossal blunder" after Andrews gave birth to her daughter Jessica, court papers charge.

"While we love Baby Jessica as our own, we are reminded of this terrible mistake each and every time we look at her," the Commack couple said in documents filed in Manhattan Supreme Court. "It is simply impossible to ignore."

Thomas Andrews is white and his wife is Dominican. But Jessica, who was born Oct. 19, 2004, has darker skin than either of them as well as "characteristics more typical of African or African-American descent," the lawsuit states.

The couple tested their daughter's DNA using a home kit and later with two more sophisticated methods. All three of the tests confirmed their suspicions - the tot has a different father.

The story came to public notice in March because a judge ruled the couple can precede with their medical malpractice lawsuit but disallowed the claims of mental suffering -- the parents' suffering and baby Jessica's suffering for being a different race than her parents. There's a lot to unpack here and The Nation's Patricia Williams took a stab at it:

What's distinctive about the Andrews case is that the parents... tried to cite... Jessica's pain and suffering for having to endure life as a black person. The Andrewses expressed concern that Jessica "may be subjected to physical and emotional illness as a result of not being the same race as her parents and siblings." They are "distressed" that she is "not even the same race, nationality, color...as they are." They describe Jessica's conception as a "mishap" so "unimaginable" that they have not told many of their relatives. (Telling the tabloids all about it must have come easier.) "We fear that our daughter will be the object of scorn and ridicule by other children," the couple said, because Jessica has "characteristics more typical of African or African-American descent." So "while we love Baby Jessica as our own, we are reminded of this terrible mistake each and every time we look at her...each and every time we appear in public."

Since the claim of mental distress of their child hinges on appearance and public perceptions of skin color, Williams comments on the family's photo:

The picture underscores the embedded cultural oddities of this case, the invisibly shifting boundaries of how we see race, extend intimacy, name "difference." According to the Post, Mrs. Andrews is "Hispanic" and apparently, by the paper's calculations, one Hispanic woman plus one white man equals "a white pair." The mother is "a light-skinned native of the Dominican Republic," seeming to indicate that while she may not be "white," she's also not "black." Each narrative implies that if the correct sperm had been used, the Andrewses would have been guaranteed a lighter-skinned child. But as most Dominicans trace their heritage to some mixture of African slaves, indigenous islanders and European settlers, and as dark skin color is a dominant trait, it could be that the true sperm donor is as "white" as Mr. Andrews. But that possibility is exiled from the word boxes that contain this child. Not only is Jessica viewed as being of a race apart from either of her parents; she is even designated a different nationality--this latter most startling for its blood-line configuration of citizenship itself.

Paul Butler at BlackProf discusses the race issue as well.

If I understand the legal situation correctly, the parents' claim of mental suffering is essentially a "wrongful conception" or "wrongful birth" claim and their suit on behalf of Baby Jessica's mental suffering is a "wrongful life" claim. New York state, where the case resides, has precedence in these situations, which Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Sheila Abdus-Salaam cited in her ruling. Regarding the "wrongful birth" claim:

By logical extension of the principles enunciated by the courts in New York that the birth of an unwanted but otherwise healthy and normal child does not constitute an injury to the child's parents, and that even parents of a child with a serious disease cannot recover for emotional injury for the birth of that child, plaintiffs in this case cannot recover for mental distress arising from having a child who is not Mr. Andrews' biological offspring.... Plaintiffs cannot recover damages based upon their claim that they were deprived of the opportunity to have a child of their own genetic makeup. The Court of Appeals has rejected as too speculative a claim that is " . . . based essentially on "wrongful nonbirth", the deprivation of an opportunity by a woman to have a child by her husband.

While these types of lawsuits were originally an additional claim for malpractice issues like failed vasectomies or lack of medical information provided by doctors, much of the case law centers around the distinction of whether or not a child with disabilities is involved. And, of course, that determination hinges on the ability to diagnose that there's "something wrong" with a child at the time a suit is filed. In the Andrewses case, if Jessica had not been perceived as looking physically different from her parents, her genetic differences (in this case, the fact that her father was not a biological parent) may have gone forever unnoticed.

And because the wrongful life suit (rejected by the judge) on Jessica's behalf claims she will suffer physical and emotional stress from having darker skin than her family, race is made here to be a kind of disability. Disability, after all, is not only about actual impairments, but also perceived impairments -- the ADA recognizes this fact of the social stigma of disability.

While the specific circumstances (of botched reproductive technology leading to wrongful birth and life claims due to skin color) may be new, positing race or gender or ethnicity as a disability is not historically new. Disability is and has frequently been used as a method of demonizing or oppressing other minority populations. That goes back at least as far as Aristotle claiming that women are mutilated (read impaired) males. The medical definition of "hysteria" linked femaleness with mental instability. Irrespective of diagnosed intellectual impairments, black male schoolchildren in U.S. public schools are much more likely than other kids to be placed in special ed classes or considered behavioral problems. There are innumerable examples of oppressed minority identities having their identifying biological difference labelled as a disabling condition.

But culturally, we find it challenging to look at the dynamic from the other direction. Sandel's book (discussed briefly in an earlier, May 26, 2007, post) on the ethics of striving for genetic perfection asks:

Is it wrong to make a child deaf by design? If so, what makes it wrong -- the deafness or the design? Suppose, for the sake of argument, that deafness is not a disability but a distinctive identity. Is there still something wrong with the idea of parents picking and choosing the kind of child they will have? Or do parents do that all the time, in their choice of mate and, these days, in their use of new reproductive technologies?

What if, with an understanding of how elusive and intersecting categories of ability and identity are, that paragraph were rewritten to more closely discuss the Andrewses court case?

Is it wrong to make a child dark-skinned by design? If so, what makes it wrong -- the dark skin or the design? Suppose, for the sake of argument, that dark skin is not a disability but a distinctive identity. Is there still something wrong with the idea of parents picking and choosing the kind of child they will have? Or do parents do that all the time, in their choice of mate and, these days, in their use of new reproductive technologies?

Intersections between identities are never perfect, and matching women's oppression to racial oppression to disability oppression is never a perfect fit of history and experience, but the Andrewses case does beg the above questions about race. The references to "dark skin" could easily be changed to "light skin" to reflect the family's presumption of genetic whiteness, but the "problem" of skin color difference remains.

I confess that I don't know exactly how this court case illuminates the debates over prenatal screening and genetic engineering to avoid children with disabilities. But they are fundamentally related.


Cross-posted at Echidne of the Snakes

Update: Also posted at Racialicious

Double discrimination for ethnic minority children with autism

Source: BBC News

Excerpt:

A National Autistic Society report on "the reality for families" suggests 62% of parents had no choice over the school their children would attend.

Children with autism who are from ethnic minorities face a double discrimination in education, campaigners say.

Parents were much less satisfied with their child's academic and social progress than White British parents.

The government said meeting the needs of autistic children was "a priority".

Parental perceptions are that their children lost out because of the sort of unwitting racism identified in a recent Department for Education and Skills report.

Joan Nelson, whose son is black and has autism, told the society she believed ethnicity had a significant impact on the level and type of education he was given.

"There appeared to be more of a belief that my child was bad as opposed to having special needs," she said.

Black boys were penalised because their special needs meant they had difficulty accessing appropriate education, because they were Black, and because they were boys, she said.

"This hinders them in achieving what they should in today's system."

Poetry Monday: Every Man's Burden

The Magic Wand
by Lynn Manning

Quick-change artist extraordinaire,
I whip out my folded cane
and change from black man to blind man
with a flick of my wrist.

It is a profound metamorphosis—
From God gifted wizard of roundball
dominating backboards across America,
To God-gifted idiot savant composer
pounding out chart-busters on a cockeyed whim;
From sociopathic gangbanger with death for eyes
to all-seeing soul with saintly spirit;
From rape deranged misogynist
to poor motherless child;
From welfare-rich pimp
to disability-rich gimp;
And from ‘white man’s burden’
to every man’s burden.

It is always a profound metamorphosis.
Whether from cursed by man to cursed by God;
or from scriptures condemned to God ordained,
My final form is never of my choosing;
I only wield the wand;
You are the magicians.

Can a deaf black lesbian charged with murder get a fair trial?

Does your answer change if you learn the trial is in South Dakota? How about if she's up for the death penalty?

From the March 6 article in the Argus Leader of South Dakota:

[Daphne] Wright, 43, was indicted in February 2006 on kidnapping and first-degree murder counts in the disappearance of 42-year-old Darlene Vander-Giesen of Rock Valley, Iowa.

Vander-Giesen's body was dismembered, and searchers spent days at a landfill west of Sioux Falls searching for her body parts. Some human remains also were found in a ditch in Minnesota....

Wright's minority status as deaf, black and homosexual have been considerations in pretrial motions and have brought national attention to the case.

Ricky D. Taylor, a deaf Washington, D.C., blogger who runs RidorLIVE.com, said by e-mail that he's received several e-mails about Wright's case. He said it's of particular interest on the East Coast, where Wright used to live.

Taylor said he's interested in the makeup of the jurors and would like to see a deaf person among them.

"As much as the crimes are heinous to us all, I am concerned about the jury selection. For one, Daphne is (a) woman, lesbian, deaf and African-American. Will she be fairly judged by her peers in the state of South Dakota? In my opinion, I doubt that," he wrote.

Courtroom discussion over the methods used to make sure Wright has adequate interpretation of court events has already been extensive:

Wright's deafness has necessitated as many as five American Sign Language interpreters to be in court at a time.

The weeks leading up to Monday's start of jury selection have featured lengthy pretrial testimony and argument about what else should happen to guarantee Wright a fair trial.

[Judge Brad] Zell already had granted a defense motion that in-court translation be videotaped and reaffirmed it Monday after hearing new arguments. The defense wants the recording to make sure what is being signed to Wright is the same as what witnesses are saying.

[Minnehaha County State's Attorney Dave] Nelson argued in court Monday that other steps the court has already taken will ensure a fair trial and that the video would draw out the appeals process if Wright is convicted.

"I don't think the state or county should have to bear this really remarkable expense," he said, assigning an $80,000 price tag to the argument.

Assistant public defender Traci Smith insisted it's crucial that the court record is accurate.

She noted that the chosen company, Midwest Litigation Services, would charge the county $60 per hour, which for a 30-day trial at eight hours per day is less than $15,000.

From ABCNews coverage:

Prosecutors say Wright got caught up in a whirlwind of lesbian drama which drove her to commit murder. The motive was jealousy. Wright says VanderGeisen, who was heterosexual, was trying to break up her lesbian relationship with a woman identified as Sallie Collins, a close friend of the victim. The two reportedly had a heated argument over the relationship shortly before the murder took place.

While prosecutors are talking about the "whirlwind of lesbian drama" others are discussing the very real complications of providing adequate ASL interpretion in real time in the courtroom of complex legal issues:

Professor Jeff Braden, an expert in deafness and development, says that Wright should not face the death penalty, even if an ideal interpreter were available. "She is at more of a disadvantage than, say, if you or I were arrested and taken to court in Pakistan, where we'd be at the mercy of a court interpreter. Having an interpreter still doesn't change the fact that deaf people don't have a native language."

The problem, Braden says, is that it is not uncommon for a woman like Wright — deaf since early childhood and born to hearing parents — to get a late start in her exposure to language. In those critical early years, Braden says, critical communication skills are lost.

"There are a number of barriers that deaf people face that would put them at a severe disadvantage in a legal proceeding. … She'd be at a significant disadvantage, even with an interpreter." Braden told ABC News.

"Battery or manslaughter may be signed the same way. An individual is not getting info they need because American Sign Language doesn't [those symbols]," Braden added. He also notes that tone of voice and other nuances that convey meaning in the courtroom would get lost in interpretation.

Other disability and Deaf activists fear any special concerns given to Wright because of her deafness would signal that Deaf people are not responsble for their actions or capable of participating in society as equals. Of course, the death penalty eligibility complicates everything, not only raising the stakes but adding a level of legal complexity.

And there's this, from a March 7 article by Keloland television:

[Public Defender Jeff] Larsen pointed out that Wright is the only african american in the courtroom. He asked the all white jury panel about race. Although some acknowledged race issues have made them uncomfortable at some point in their life, all potential jurors said race won't be a factor in how they find the verdict. Jurors answered the same way when asked questions about Wright being a lesbian.

So, no black or deaf people on the jury, for sure, it seems. Any gay folks? Can this be fair under these circumstances?

Oklahoma opens its first accessible prison

In a report out of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, Angel Riggs writes:

Department of Corrections officials this week began moving several of the state's disabled inmates into Oklahoma's first handicapped-accessible prison unit.

The federally funded unit at Joseph Harp Correctional Facility near Lexington will house 262 prisoners. The DOC plans to move in 40 inmates each week until the facility is full.

Dubbed the "ADA facility" because of its compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, the unit is accessible for inmates who use wheelchairs and those who are visually impaired.

"We will fill it up extremely quickly," said Justin Jones, DOC director. The state currently has enough inmates who use wheelchairs to fill the unit, he said.

However, the facility also will house inmates being treated for cancer, on dialysis or recovering from major surgeries, Jones said. The prison unit also will accommodate offenders with dementia or those who are in the early stages of Alzheimer's disease.

This should concern prisoners' advocates, mental health advocates, disability rights activists, and anyone concerned with segregation, mandatory sentencing that lengthens prisons terms, crime and punishment, and racism in the justice system, that last effecting who gets to grow old in our prisons. Also, it begs the question, exactly how have disabled prisoners been faring these many years if this is Oklahoma's first prison to be made accessible? The answer is that they've not been faring well at all, of course, with conditions many disabled prisoners have faced challenging the standard of avoiding "cruel and unusual punishment."

New Mobility magazine's Jean Stewart covered the appalling conditions of inaccessibility in U.S. prisons almost a decade ago:

Gloria Johnson, for instance, a 43-year-old mother of two who has multiple sclerosis, is imprisoned in Chowchilla, Calif., 140 miles from the facility where Howard Andrews lived and died. Gloria is blind and uses a wheelchair, having lost the use of her arms and legs. When I visited her in January 1997, she was receiving haphazard attendant services, sometimes none at all, despite her inability to perform her own self-care and despite the clear mandate of the ADA and its applicability to the California prison setting.

In staff orders obtained by a journalist for the San Francisco Bay Guardian, the prison physician wrote regarding Gloria's care: "Do not overly coddle--perhaps deliberately 'delay' calls for bedpan." Gloria reports: "The nurses wouldn't do anything for me. They wouldn't help me eat. From Sunday evening at 8 p.m. to Tuesday at 2:30 p.m., I didn't use the bathroom at all. One night I had to go, so I fell out of bed and tried to drag myself to the bathroom. I didn't make it."

In an administrative complaint Gloria later filed at the prison, she described the kind of care she received: "While on my menstrual cycle last week, I had no choice but to spend hours--sometimes up to eight--in a blood-soaked pad. A couple of times when staff did come and change them and I had soaked through the pad, they did not even change the sheets or my underwear. I have been here 18 days and been given a shower only three times."

And:

Easton Beckford, a paraplegic Jamaican prisoner serving time in an upstate New York prison, fights as doggedly as did Howard Andrews to control his own medical care. When I first met Easton, his wheelchair had been taken from him for months on end, rendering him unable to move from his bed. Both sink and toilet in his cell were inaccessible; Easton frequently soiled himself. As punishment for his complaints about lack of access, he'd been denied permission to use the shower room. Thus forced to take "birdbaths" in his cell, he inevitably spilled water on the floor. As punishment for the spillage, guards would periodically shut off the water in his cell. He was denied necessary catheters and treatment for his pressure sores, without which he was in imminent danger of infection, and his epilepsy medication was randomly withheld.

In a letter to me dated February 2, 1995, Easton outlined his situation. Because his persistent demands for medical care were viewed as a nuisance, he'd been detained in a "strip cell" and deprived of everything--including clothing, mattress and blankets--thus forcing him to lie directly on the metal bunk with two decubiti. "I was left in a strip cell after Dec. 7 to Dec. 24.

The first night I ask the nurse about mattress & blanket her response was 'You're not getting anything to sleep on tonight Beckford because you're not cooperating.' That night I get a roll of toilet paper from the CO [correctional officer] who was working the unit. I spread it out over the bunk as best as I could to guard against the cold steel & using my dreadlocks as a pillow that is how I slept that first night. By the next night I was able to get 2 more roll of toilet paper & I spread them out & get what sleep I could. It went on like that until I made a nest on the bunk out of toilet paper but I'd 2 pressure sores coming out on my hips. I complain about the skin breakdown but no one came to look at them."

Will accessible prisons create more humane treatment for disabled inmates? Perhaps simply eliminating some architectural inaccessibilities will keep disability from being a source of "discipline" for some inmates with impairments, but will separating out disabled prisoners from others create a different kind of institutional bias or neglect? Historically, that's certainly been true of state run facilities housing disabled people.

While it could be argued that finally achieving ADA standards is a success, the state of Oklahoma expects to move 40 inmates per week into the new facility until it is full. By my estimation, the new joint will be overcrowded too in less than six weeks. And that's one facility in one state, with the whole prison population both aging and growing larger. Within the big picture then, the ribbon-cutting for one small "ADA facility" only illustrates the larger failures and human rights issues of the prison industry in the United States as a whole.

Bush won't renominate anti-disability rights judge for appeals court

The Associated Press reports that:

In a concession to the Senate's new Democratic majority, President Bush won't rename four controversial federal appeals court nominees whose confirmations were blocked last year, Republican officials said last week.

William Haynes, William G. Myers III and Michael Wallace all asked to have their appointments withdrawn, these officials said. Judge Terrence Boyle was informed of the White House's decision, according to an ally.

In 2005, Boyle, a federal judge in North Carolina, was noted by the People for the American Way as being unfit for promotion to the federal Court of Appeals for several reasons. From the PFAW website:

Judge Boyle’s record is troubling in at least two distinct ways. First, he has been reversed frequently by the Fourth Circuit, one of the most conservative appeals courts in the entire country. In fact, he has been reversed considerably more frequently than has the average district court judge in the Fourth Circuit and around the country. He has also been reversed an average of more than twice as often per year as any other federal district court judge President Bush has nominated to the appellate bench. Such a high record of reversals, especially considering that Judge Boyle has frequently been reversed for making the same or similar errors, calls into question his ability as a jurist. And his apparent effort to obscure his record of reversals in his answers under oath to questions from the Senate Judiciary Committee, as detailed below, raises extremely serious concerns.

Second, Judge Boyle’s record reveals a troubling history of espousing a damaging neo-federalist philosophy from the bench that is particularly harmful to civil rights. He has been very aggressive in supporting “states’ rights” views in cases that criticize Congress’s authority to protect individuals from discrimination committed by state agencies. Moreover, a number of his decisions have been specifically hostile to civil rights, including with respect to cases brought by people with disabilities as well as in redistricting and race and sex discrimination cases, many of which have been reversed. And he has been reversed several times in important cases concerning campaign finance.

Boyle's troubling record includes the case of the United States v. North Carolina, an employment discrimination case about the state's gender bias in hiring correctional officers at men's prisons. Among the many conclusions Boyle made that basically rejected the federal right to apply Title VII to a state, he declared that North Carolina's "culture" was a valid reason for disparate employment practices.

And Boyle's hostility toward the ADA has been well documented by rulings hostile to both the federal law and disabled persons' civil rights. In Pierce v. King, Boyle denied the ADA applies to state prisons because they do not have a "substantial effect" on interstate commerce. The plaintiff in the case filed an ADA employment discrimination case against NC because the state prison did not offer him accommodations for prison work that could lead to time off for good behavior. Boyle went further, saying that Congress had no authority at all to apply the ADA to states because, unlike other civil rights laws, the ADA seeks "special" and not "equal" treatment.

While the Fourth Circuit upheld Boyle's decision in the Pierce case, it was vacated when the Supreme Court unanimously ruled on a similar Pennsylvania case, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections v. Yeskey. That case addressed the discrimination of a disabled prisoner's ineligibility for an inaccessible "Motivational Boot Camp" for first-time offenders that significantly shortens a prisoner's time behind bars. Even Justice Scalia, who wrote the opinion, asserted that “the plain text of Title II of the ADA unambiguously extends to state prison inmates.” The broader issue of Congress' power to apply the ADA to the states was not addressed.

In Brown v. North Carolina Division of Motor Vehicles, disabled North Carolinans sued against what was basically a tax on disability, where disabled parking permits required payment of a fee not imposed on nondisabled citizens. Again, Boyle used the opportunity to declare the ADA special rather than equal treatment under the law, and even declared disabled people to not be a legitimate group insofar as protection from discrimination is concerned.

The PFAW report on Boyle continues:

The Supreme Court has repudiated Boyle’s theories even in a decision limiting individuals’ rights under the ADA. In Board of Trustees of the Univ. of Ala. v. Garrett, 531 U.S. 356 (2001), the Court ruled 5-4 that individuals could not sue states for damages under Title I of the ADA because of insufficient evidence of state discrimination against the disabled and because the remedy was not congruent and proportional to the violation. But nowhere did the majority suggest that legislation pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment must be limited to discrimination based on race, alienage, national origin or gender, and nowhere did the Court suggest that states cannot be required to comply with the ADA as Boyle had ruled. To the contrary, even the court majority specifically recognized that while damages were not available, Title I of the ADA “still prescribes standards applicable to the states” which can be enforced in lawsuits “for injunctive relief,” directly contrary to Boyle’s view. Id. at 374, n. 9. And in Tennessee v. Lane, 124 S.Ct. 1978 (2004), the Court ruled that even money damages may be available for some violations of Title II of the ADA. Boyle’s radical “states’ rights” view goes far beyond even the most conservative justices on the Supreme Court and would effectively dismantle the ADA as applied to state government agencies.

Note that last sentence above to understand exactly who Bush has been nominating to federal positions: Boyle’s radical “states’ rights” view goes far beyond even the most conservative justices on the Supreme Court and would effectively dismantle the ADA as applied to state government agencies.

In Williams v. Avent, Inc., Boyle gave summary judgment against a plaintiff claiming she was fired instead of being given reasonable accommodation for a back injury that minimized her ability to lift much weight. The Fourth Circuit spanked Boyle in its discussion of "reasonable accommodation" under appeal. The description of that judgment's criticism of Boyle is worthy of reading as presented on page 20 of the PFAW .pdf file -- you'll need to scroll down to the 20th page to see it.

But there's more. On environmental racism and religious discrimination Boyle also denied the state was culpable for discrimination. The Fourth Circuit has also reversed several decisions by Boyle on redistricting cases where he consistently favored white plaintiff voters. On one occasion, Boyle issued an opinion on a case he was not even assigned to -- before the assigned judge ever heard arguments.

Finally, on federal campaign finance laws, Boyle has sided with local anti-abortion organizations against the FEC. The Fourth Circuit did reverse.

Boyle was the only one of the four judges who Bush will apparently not be renominating that did not withdraw himself from consideration. And Bush's decision is only prompted by the clear opposition he will face from a Democratic Congress. This is a direct effect of our vote, though only time will tell if Bush's next nominations are any better on civil rights for disabled folks.

Saturday Slumgullion #19

On Native Americans, indigenous peoples and the blogging of others on Thanksgiving and related things:

Deconstructing the myths of the first Thanksgiving: A bibliography. Via Debbie Reese at American Indians in Children's Literature

American Indians in Children's Literature -- Yeah, check out the whole blog.

Women of Color: Oaxaca coverage -- Brownfemipower has been covering the uprising and fight for rights of the people in the Oaxaca region of Mexico. Violent political struggles, of course, cause death and impairments and often the people fighting for greater freedoms live in extreme poverty that also causes death and impairments. Browse the blog's sidebar categories for further coverage of nation/state violence, indigenous rights, violence against women of color and disability.

I Blame the Patriarchy: Thanks for nothin' -- Twisty provides a feminist interpretation of Thanksgiving celebration.

My Left Wing: Give thanks for genocide -- Thanksgiving as a National Day of Mourning. And turkey.

My Private Casbah: For those with warm and fuzzy feelings about Thanksgiving -- A collection of Native and non-Native links. Also, 13 reasons why Bint does not celebrate Thanksgiving.

Heart, Mind, Soul and Strength: Pass along the blessings --

Thanksgiving in the U.S.A. has become a season not only of Thanksgiving, but also (unfortunately) a season of collective shame and regret over what our forefathers did to the Native Americans. I'd encourage Christians to take the lead in being clear-headed and constructive on this front, not by sweeping the shame and regret under the rug, but by acting with deliberate generosity towards the Native Nations.

Do we share the blame for the wrongs committed by our ancestors? I'd expect we only share in the blame if we see the continuing injustice and take no action.

Report from Cane Creek: Thanksgiving -- Feast or fast?

Spontaneous Arising: Thanksgiving: Eye of the beholder

Mole's Progressive Democrat: Thanksgiving

The Digest: The Indians -- Fighting terrorism since 1492

Thanksgiving tradition as seen through Indian eyes

TiyospayesNow writes in "Thanksgiving, Hope and the Hidden Heart of Evil":

When the Pilgrims came to Plymouth Rock, they were poor and hungry -- half of them died within a few months from disease and hunger. When Squanto, a Wampanoag man, found them, they were in a pitiful state. He spoke English, having traveled to Europe, and took pity on them. Their English crops had failed. The native people fed them through the winter and taught them how to grow their food.

These were not merely "friendly Indians." They had already experienced European slave traders raiding their villages for a hundred years or so, and they were wary -- but it was their way to give freely to those who had nothing. Among many of our peoples, showing that you can give without holding back is the way to earn respect. Among the Dakota, my father's people, they say, when asked to give, "Are we not Dakota and alive?" It was believed that by giving there would be enough for all -- the exact opposite of the system we live in now, which is based on selling, not giving.

Go read it all.

Link via Heart

Going Native: Thanksgiving Day

During grad school I read Oglala Sioux Russell Means' autobiography Where White Men Fear to Tread as part of a three-student special conference course (we also read a book on Latina literary criticism and Connie Panzarino's autobiography) for my public administration degree. We discussed the problems Native Americans have had with the federal government throughout the history of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), and we talked about how controversial Means is among Indians.

Means admits to his own violent tendencies within his marriages, as I recall, but the thing he said that has stuck with me the most is this: Means claims that generations of Indian children were physically and sexually abused in the boarding schools they were forced to attend. In addition to being stolen from their families, punished if they spoke their native language and many sterilized when they reached sexual maturity, that is. That's how a civilized nation commits genocide.

Image: Photo of a Thanksgiving Day play at an Indian boarding school, ca. 1900. Eight grade-school children are pictured, one seated girl in white pilgrim costume and two boys standing behind her wearing long feathered Indian headdresses. The other five children are seated on the floor with the pilgrim girl and seem to be wearing dark-colored school uniforms. Their facial expressions are sober, or even glum. From the Minnesota Historical Society Visual Database.

Happy holiday to everyone.

Going Native: Native women, their rights and violence

A mini-slumgullion of links today on the topic of Native American women's rights and domestic violence:

TiyospayeNow: Fire Thunder Impeachment and the Rights of Women -- Jacqueline Keeler connects the recent impeachment of Cecelia Fire Thunder as Oglala Sioux tribal president to the rights of native women to reproductive freedom and safety from violence:

In addition to impeaching the president, the Oglala Tribal council went one step further than the state of South Dakota -- not only making abortion illegal under any circumstances, except life endangerment, but they made seeking an abortion, or helping someone seek an abortion punishable by banishment from the reservation. So, if a young women is a victim of incest or rape and seeks help from another woman to find an abortion clinic, she and her friend would be banished. Meanwhile, the tribal council resists efforts to deal as stringently with the issue of rape, incest and violence against women, so the men who perpetuate rape are not similarly punished.

Women's Space: Cecelia Fire Thunder, multiple posts -- Heart, who provided the above link to Keeler's eloquent writing, covers the events that led to Fire Thunder's impeachment. Lots of research and excellent links in her multiple entries.

Indian Country: Halting sexual violence -- A June article shows Fire Thunder's pro-choice efforts extend to addressing tribal problems of sexual violence:

Fire Thunder faces an impeachment hearing on June 29. She plans to fight for her office.

''The abortion issue,'' she said, ''is the key that opens the padlock to sexual deviancy that is occurring on the Pine Ridge reservation.''

Sexual deviancy is what Fire Thunder calls rape and incest: crimes that are rarely adjudicated on the reservation. The epidemic nature of the abuse is noticed in drug and alcohol treatment programs where, Fire Thunder said, 87 percent of women will disclose that they were sexually abused, many as children. The ultimate end of domestic assault is rape, what Fire Thunder calls the ''ultimate subjugation.''

Most women on the Pine Ridge reservation, she said, know someone who has been raped. And the stories pour out as women across the reservation start to talk: stories about children bearing male relatives' babies.

Rape victims in particular, Fire Thunder said, need to have the option to terminate the resulting pregnancy.

NOW: Native American women and violence -- Lisa Bungalia writes about the lack of law enforcement assistance for domestic violence victims in tribal areas:

In addition to domestic abuse, Native American women also experience the highest levels of sexual and domestic abuse of any group. A report from the American Indian Women’s Chemical Health Project found that three-fourths of Native American women have experienced some type of sexual assault in their lives. However, most remain silent due to cultural barriers, a high level of mistrust for white dominated agencies, fear of familial alienation, and a history of inactivity by state and tribal agencies to prosecute crimes committed against them.

Indian Country: Indian women rally against white Christian influence on tribal abortion ban -- At a rally just before the November elections where Fire Thunder failed to win back her presidency:

Fire Thunder and Cook-Lynn said American Indian voters have been influenced by the ideology of the Christian right, which they noted has no place in the political arena.

''This is an attack on women's rights that is ongoing; this is a national issue in Indian country.

''If they can tell you you can't have an abortion, they can tell you you must have one,'' Cook-Lynn said, referring to the practice of a few decades ago of sterilizing American Indian women without their permission.

''This is a result of colonization and Christianity; they don't teach reproductive rights,'' she said.

Domestic violence and tribal protection of indigenous women in the United States -- A lengthy paper written by two women professors at the American Indian Law Certificate program at the University of New Mexico School of Law that includes discussion of the role of Indian feminists in tribal solutions to the problem.

Governmentally coerced sterilization of Native American women -- A history of eugenics and genocide through depriving Indian women of their reproductive rights.

More links and resources for tribal domestic violence.