Thinking about institutionalized access
Jun. 27th, 2010 06:11 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sasha_featherSomething I want to write about is institutionalized access.
To begin with, there is the social model of disability. People are not disabled by diseases or conditions, but by society and how it is set up. People are disabled by a lack of accessible facilities, by the fast pace of life, by refusals for accommodation, by language, by discrimination.
It is somewhat arbitrary what needs society meets for its citizens and what needs it doesn't meet. For example, most of us reading the internet have electricity and water automatically delivered to our homes. With the flick of a switch or the turn of a tap, we have heat, light, power, and water (both hot and cold). However in order to get food, we have to be able to leave our houses and go get it. (Yes, there are some grocery delivery services, but they are expensive and not widely available.) Some information is easy to find, some is hard to find. Some needs are easy to meet, some are next to impossible. It is easy to go to a store for aspirin; it can be very hard to get a prescription for narcotic painkillers. It is easy to buy a bicycle in any city in America, but to buy a wheelchair? Very difficult. It is relatively easy to get plastic surgery on one's nose, but hard to get more controversial surgeries.
So for disabled people, suddenly the world is a lot harder to navigate because it is not designed for people with disabilities. It is designed for the "default" or unmarked human. This is a practical concern but it also sucks because it is discrimination. But this does not have to be so!
We can institutionalize access and incorporate universal design into our lives and events even in small ways. Language, attitudes, blogging practices, choosing accessible venues, listening to people and prioritizing access.
"Well," you might be saying, "can't people just ask for help? I'd be happy to help out anyone who needed it!"
It turns out that asking for help is HARD. Especially if you have to do it over and over and don't feel like you can give anything back. Especially if you have a communication disorder or social anxiety or something else that is disabling. Requesting or requiring people to ask for help is ok sometimes, but it puts the onus on disabled people. It also requires them to self-identify or "out" themselves as disabled, which for some people with invisible disabilities is not necessarily something they want to do.
jesse_the_k wrote a good post about this, Making Space for Wheelchairs and Scooters.
So instead, why not institutionalize access? Make it part of your venue, part of your event, part of your goals and expectations. Set the standards. Make a place for disabled people. It is the right thing to do.
I would like to see less of this:
Description: sign with wheelchair access symbol, with circle and cross through it, indicating that wheelchairs are not allowed. Text reads, "steep path."
And more of this:
Description: Blue sign next to a ramp. Text reads, "Please - Respect the disabled. Do not chain bicycles to ramp."
I am thinking about cross-posting this to access-fandom, please advise. Comments very much welcome.
To begin with, there is the social model of disability. People are not disabled by diseases or conditions, but by society and how it is set up. People are disabled by a lack of accessible facilities, by the fast pace of life, by refusals for accommodation, by language, by discrimination.
It is somewhat arbitrary what needs society meets for its citizens and what needs it doesn't meet. For example, most of us reading the internet have electricity and water automatically delivered to our homes. With the flick of a switch or the turn of a tap, we have heat, light, power, and water (both hot and cold). However in order to get food, we have to be able to leave our houses and go get it. (Yes, there are some grocery delivery services, but they are expensive and not widely available.) Some information is easy to find, some is hard to find. Some needs are easy to meet, some are next to impossible. It is easy to go to a store for aspirin; it can be very hard to get a prescription for narcotic painkillers. It is easy to buy a bicycle in any city in America, but to buy a wheelchair? Very difficult. It is relatively easy to get plastic surgery on one's nose, but hard to get more controversial surgeries.
So for disabled people, suddenly the world is a lot harder to navigate because it is not designed for people with disabilities. It is designed for the "default" or unmarked human. This is a practical concern but it also sucks because it is discrimination. But this does not have to be so!
We can institutionalize access and incorporate universal design into our lives and events even in small ways. Language, attitudes, blogging practices, choosing accessible venues, listening to people and prioritizing access.
"Well," you might be saying, "can't people just ask for help? I'd be happy to help out anyone who needed it!"
It turns out that asking for help is HARD. Especially if you have to do it over and over and don't feel like you can give anything back. Especially if you have a communication disorder or social anxiety or something else that is disabling. Requesting or requiring people to ask for help is ok sometimes, but it puts the onus on disabled people. It also requires them to self-identify or "out" themselves as disabled, which for some people with invisible disabilities is not necessarily something they want to do.
jesse_the_k wrote a good post about this, Making Space for Wheelchairs and Scooters. So instead, why not institutionalize access? Make it part of your venue, part of your event, part of your goals and expectations. Set the standards. Make a place for disabled people. It is the right thing to do.
I would like to see less of this:
Description: sign with wheelchair access symbol, with circle and cross through it, indicating that wheelchairs are not allowed. Text reads, "steep path."
And more of this:
Description: Blue sign next to a ramp. Text reads, "Please - Respect the disabled. Do not chain bicycles to ramp."
I am thinking about cross-posting this to access-fandom, please advise. Comments very much welcome.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-04 12:47 am (UTC)It probably sounds ridiculous that these aren't things I am able to intuit already; I think it's partly because so much of the anxiety involved is focused around other people, whose behaviour is not knowable, it becomes easy to incorrectly assume there are no other factors. And, indeed, to start feeling a little hopeless about really being able to effectively help improve that for the person in question.
But reading through your list I found myself realising that yes, these are all things I've seen assist in creating a calmer environment already.
I absolutely agree that setting out clear guidelines for any planned event or professional conduct in public spaces is very useful, but I also think that it's probably the area which is most likely to break down simply because it's not as static an issue as putting up signs or choosing (not) to have certain light/sound features. Especially if we're talking about a general attitude to access issues rather than planning around a specific event.
But the idea of looking at the functional limitations beyond the more obvious "social interaction" issues is very useful and you're right, yields immediate, obvious, practical solutions.
Not to say that there aren't good practical solutions to the social interaction issue either - you named some of them, and I know there are others including making an environment welcome for a friend/relative/support worker to also attend if necessary/desired. But I still think it's the most difficult issue to solve because it's the most fluid and dependent on the most changing factors.
Thanks again for taking the time to put together such a thoughtful and clear reply. It really has helped me organise my thoughts on the issue and has given me a new framework in which to consider things.