- Kierunek sortowaniaDomyślnie
✔ Tytuł zdjęcia, A → Z
Tytuł zdjęcia, Z → A
Data utworzenia, wcześniejsze → starsze
Data utworzenia, starsze → wcześniejsze
Data publikacji, wcześniejsze → starsze
Data publikacji, starsze → wcześniejsze
Ocena, wysoka → niska
Ocena, niska → wysoka
Liczba odwiedzin, wysoka → niska
Liczba odwiedzin, niska → wysoka - JęzykAfrikaans Argentina AzÉrbaycanca
á¥áá áá£áá Äesky Ãslenska
áá¶áá¶ááááá à¤à¥à¤à¤à¤£à¥ বাà¦à¦²à¦¾
தமிழ௠à²à²¨à³à²¨à²¡ ภาษาà¹à¸à¸¢
ä¸æ (ç¹é«) ä¸æ (é¦æ¸¯) Bahasa Indonesia
Brasil Brezhoneg CatalÃ
ç®ä½ä¸æ Dansk Deutsch
Dhivehi English English
English Español Esperanto
Estonian Finnish Français
Français Gaeilge Galego
Hrvatski Italiano Îλληνικά
íêµì´ LatvieÅ¡u Lëtzebuergesch
Lietuviu Magyar Malay
Nederlands Norwegian nynorsk Norwegian
Polski Português RomânÄ
Slovenšcina Slovensky Srpski
Svenska Türkçe Tiếng Viá»t
Ù¾Ø§Ø±Ø³Û æ¥æ¬èª ÐÑлгаÑÑки
ÐакедонÑки Ðонгол Ð ÑÑÑкий
СÑпÑки УкÑаÑнÑÑка ×¢×ר×ת
اÙعربÙØ© اÙعربÙØ©
Strona główna / Albumy / Tag social attitudes about disability 2
ADAPT (558)
Grapevine (the title is surrounded by grape leaves and clusters of grapes) Weekly Happy birthday, TJ, see Editorial, p. 2. New Thomas Pynchon novel reviewed, see p. 5. FREE! In This Issue: Editorial . . . . ............ . . . 2 Letters to the Editor ..... 2 City Board Agenda.........2 Lithuanian Story to Tell..3 Grapevine Digest............3 Sheffield Nelson's Vi......4 The Way Were.................5 Grapevine Comics...........6 KUAF Radio Guide.........6 Classifieds.........................7 Community Sportsline.....7 Dictionary of Democracy..7 Watching the Environment 8 The Movies . . . . . . ..............8 Local Live Music . . . ..........8 Volume XXI, Number 32 A Free Weekly Newspaper Fayetteville, Arkansas Friday, April 13, 1990 PHOTO (by Tom Olin): The front line of a big march, headed by an African American man (George Roberts) in a motorized wheelchair with dark glasses and a sign reading "We Shall Overcome", a woman (Stephanie Thomas) with frizzy hair and mirror sunglasses in a manual wheelchair, a sign across her legs reads "Access is A Civil Right", a Latino blind man (Frank Lozano) standing tall with his back back, bandanna-headband, and dog-guide Frazier on his left all with stern expressions on their faces. To Frank's left a young girl (Jennifer Keelan) almost stands in her wheelchair yelling a chant as her grandmother and sister Kailee push her along. Behind them a man in a white button down shirt (Evan Kemp) smiles, Justin Dart's hat is visible over Stephanie's hair and he is being pushed by a tall man (Jay Rochlin) in a suit with a button on his lapel. Between Frank and Jennifer, a short man (Michael Winter) in a wheelchair is visible. Behind them, row upon row of marchers heads, several with mouths open chanting. Breaking Down the Barriers Civil Rights for People with Disabilities by Yaél Hana Bethiem In 1983 I considered killing myself. l considered this out of a deep despair, an agony over my life. In 1983 I had been diagnosed with a progressive disease. I could no longer work, could no longer sit in chairs and could stand for shorter and shorter periods of time. In other words, I was becoming disabled. I was panicked. How could I live without my physical life, my strength, my independence? What I didn't see at the time was that I was buying into our culture's attitudes about disability. I could not value myself or value my life because the system I had to fight to get my basic needs met, did not value me; l live in a culture that believes that "out of sight, out of mind" is acceptable policy for dealing with people with disabilities. In a culture that values productivity above all else, those who cannot produce, or who need assistance to be able to produce, are considered a burden. Our culture also has a myth called the “American way," which says that if anyone "tries hard enough" he or she can “make it." When applied to people with disabilities this means that if only we “try harder" we can "overcome." We can rise above the barriers, showing superhuman strength, and then we will be more acceptable. This attitude makes people believe the barriers do not need tn be removed. Instead, they think we, the disabled, need to overcome them. In other words, the closer we cart be to “normal," the more we are accepted. Those who cannot become more normal are locked away, out of sight, out of mind. Those of us living within this oppression, for it is oppression, often internalize the culture's attitudes. We believe there is something wrong with us. Millions of people share this fate with me; we are locked away by a society that would prefer to pretend we do not exist. We are imprisoned by attitudes that do not see people with disabilities as fully human; attitudes that expect us to "overcome" (or heal ourselves); attitudes that create barriers, or do not see the barriers that do exist. There are 43 million people with disabilities in the United States. We are one of the most repressed minorities in this country. We are denied access to basic rights, transportation, jobs, and respect. For people with disabilities there are thousands of ways the oppression affects us, thousands of forms of prejudice and visible and invisible barriers. An example of the effects of this oppression is the story of David Rivlin. David was a quadriplegic who, last summer, chose to have his respirator turned off. He went to court to ask for the right to die. His story was aired on TV. I heard people around me say, “l would do that too. I wouldn't want to live like that." David lived in a nursing home. He lay in bed twenty-four hours a day tied to a stable respirator. David didn't have to live this way. He could have had a portable respirator and thus been able to use a wheelchair. He didn't know about a portable respirator and no one ever told him. The government was paying $2300 day to keep David in a nursing home, but would pay only $207 a month for an attendant so David could live independently. The day before David died, a reporter covering David's story discovered that money could have been gotten for David to live independently if someone had known how lo “work the system." David's struggle reflects the struggle of people with disabilities in this country. If David, and other people with disabilities were given their right to make choices in their lives all along, there would be no necessity of fighting for the right to die. The Americans With Disabilities Act There is a growing awareness of the need for change in policy and attitude toward people with disabilities. Last year a bill was introduced in Congress called the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA). The ADA would begin to guarantee civil rights for people with disabilities. Although it has already been modified since its inception, the ADA, as it now stands, would be a beginning to removing barriers that prevent people with disabilities from participating in society. Unfortunately, the ADA is facing serious compromise due to powerful lobbies against it. It is also facing changes that would remove its power as a civil rights act. Last summer, the ADA was passed almost unanimously by the Senate. It was endorsed by President Bush. It then moved into the House of Representatives, where it is now stalled. The most powerful lobbies against the bill are Greyhound and the National Federation of Independent Businesses along with the Chambers of Commerce. Greyhound is against the ADA because they will have to equip new buses with wheelchair lifts. They claim it will cost them millions of dollars, yet they are adding in costs that have nothing to do with the Americans With Disabilities Act. While using erroneous concepts for the cost figures, Greyhound is pouring money into Washington to fight the bill. The National Federation of Independent Businesses also base their antagonism to the ADA on erroneous concepts. The NFIB is saying the ADA will cause hardship for businesses. The ADA requires that public facilities constructed after the ADA becomes law be accessible. Existing facilities have to be accessible within two years of enactment if the access is "readily achievable without much difficulty or expense." In other words. businesses can decide for themselves whether they can afford to provide access. On March 10, American Disabled for Accessible Public Transportation (ADAPT) held a march on Washington to promote awareness of the Americans With Disabilities Act. Over 1,000 people with disabilities came from all over the country. They marched from the White House to the steps of the Capitol. The rest of the week was filled with talks with key figures and demonstrations. Many people participated in planned civil disobedience aimed at calling attention to the current injustice. Because the ADA is civil rights legislation, it ties in with the Civil Rights Act of 1964. New legislation has just been introduced that would create real remedies for violations of the Civil Rights Act. Because the ADA is tied to the Civil Rights Act these remedies would also apply to violations of the ADA. Opponents of ADA want to separate the ADA from the Civil Rights Act. For people with disabilities this would be a compromise that essentially negates the purpose of the ADA. People with disabilities deserve to be treated fairly and humanely, which at this point we are not. It is time to remove the barriers, especially the barriers of mind. It is time to break down the walls that have kept people with disabilities imprisoned. The Americans With Disabilities Act is a very important step. Please write to Hon. John Paul Hammerschmidt at U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. 20515 or 35 E. Mountain, Fayetteville, AR 72701 . Let him know you are aware of the ADA. Ask him to support it as it now stands. Only unity can save our threatened planet.On every level we have to move out of the mindset of differences and into the awareness of our shared humaneness. Now it is time also to move out of separation based on physical ability. Only then can we really share our resources. Only awareness of barriers can bring the possibility of their removal. Yael Hana Bethiemn is a free lance writer from Eureka Springs.
ADAPT (595)
US NEWS AND WORLD REPORT Sept. 18, 1989 [This story appears in ADAPT 595, 590 and 602. It is included in its entirety here for ease of reading.] [Headline] Liberation day for the disabled by Joseph P. Shapiro Forty-three million will soon win basic civil-rights protections. Their growing movement has brushed aside the opposition and is changing America The day before the Senate passed historic legislation to protect the civil rights of disabled people, Mary Jane Owen got another rude reminder of the daily discrimination that faces people like her. Owen, a writer who is blind and uses a wheelchair, was lobbying senators for the disability-rights bill. But when she moved onto Constitution Avenue to go home, a taxi driver at curbside sped away rather than pick up a woman in a wheelchair. It is similar acts, repeated hundreds of thousands of times a day to the nation's 43 million disabled, that fueled an angry political movement that has brought the nation to a path-breaking moment. In a few weeks President Bush is expected to sign the Americans with Disabilities Act, a broad statement that will extend to the disabled the same protections against discrimination that were given to blacks and women in the 1960s and 1970s. The Senate passed the measure 76 to 8 last week, and the House is likely to approve it next month. The bill is a profound rethinking of how this country views disabled people, defined as anyone with a physical or mental impairment that "substantially limits" everyday living. For the first time, America is saying the biggest problem facing disabled people is not their own blindness, deafness or other physical condition but discrimination. The bill, says Senate sponsor Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), is "an emancipation proclamation for people with handicaps" that will fundamentally change their lives, getting more of them out of their homes and institutions and into full participation in society. Under the new law, restaurants, stores, hotels and theaters can no longer turn away a person with cerebral palsy, epilepsy, AIDS or any other disability. Employers would be prohibited from rejecting qualified workers just because they are disabled, and they would be required to fashion generally inexpensive modifications to the workplace to make it accessible to the disabled, such as putting a desk on blocks to raise it for a wheelchair user. It would also require that new buses be equipped with lifts so that wheelchair users could get on public transit. New buildings, or those undergoing major reconstruction, would have to be made accessible to disabled people, with elevators installed in shopping malls and new structures higher than two stories. Telephone companies would have to hire operators who could take a message typed by a deaf person on a Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (TDD) and then relay it orally to a hearing person on another phone. [Subheading] Cost of Access. Businesses, particularly small ones, are wary of the changes. John Sloan, president of the National Federation of Independent Business, complained that the bill will impose costly requirements on businesses" and is "so broadly written" that it is unclear how far, and to what expense, a business will have to go to avoid being open to a lawsuit. Sponsors of the bill said estimates that its implementation might cost billions of dollars were wildly exaggerated. Past experience shows they may be correct. When Congress in 1973 protected disabled people from discrimination by institutions that receive federal funding, North Carolina education officials estimated it would cost them $15 billion to make state university buildings accessible, says architect Ronald Mace of Barrier Free Environments. Instead, many changes were simple and cheap. To accommodate students in wheelchairs, classes were moved to ground floors rather than installing elevators to carry them to top floors. The cost so far has totaled $l5 million, says Mace. Similarly, a 1982 study for the Labor Department found that half the accommodations made in the workplace cost little or nothing. For example, it was easy for companies to change a wheelchair user's work hours to conform with the schedule of lift-equipped buses. Another 30 percent of the accommodations were achieved for between $100 and $500. That included such changes as giving a telephone head-set to a quadriplegic telephone operator. Despite the concerns of business groups, their opposition to a bill that would open them up to a new spate of lawsuits was surprisingly muted and not nearly as vociferous as their fight against the 1964 Civil Rights Act. For one thing, no one wanted to look like a bigot fighting a civil-rights bill, particularly one that was rushing through Congress. More important, businesses in the last few years have seen disabled people as a new source of labor and customers. “If they can get to the stores, business is going to increase" says the U.S. Chamber of Commerce‘s Nancy Fulco, who nonetheless lobbied to limit the rights bill's impact on business. [Subheading] Hidden Army. The mixed feelings of business groups underscored how disability rights is a civil-rights movement different from any other. Unlike the black and women's movements, disability-rights groups have never filled the streets with hundreds of thousands of marchers. Instead, the disability movement boasts “a hidden army,“ says former Representative Tony Coelho, who has epilepsy. Since a fifth of the nation's population has some form of disability, ranging from mental retardation to severe arthritis, Coelho argues, “disability impacts practically every family.“ Nowhere was that clearer than in Congress and the White House. where key supporters of the rights bill felt a particular need to win the bill‘s passage because they personally know about disabilities. Most important was President Bush, who has two sons with disabilities. Bush's strong statements in support of the bill during the 1988 campaign won him important support in the usually Democratic disability community. Nevertheless, the rights bill was in trouble until mid-June because of business fears about its cost. Then, on the day he left Congress, Coelho called Bush to ask him to renew his commitment to the bill. Within a few weeks, White House Chief of Staff John Sununu convened a strategy session with key senators to negotiate a compromise. That was easy to achieve once sponsors agreed to the White House request they drop the provision that would have allowed the disabled to sue for punitive damages if they were discriminated against. a provision that was the most opposed by business lobbies. From that moment, the compromise bill has been on a fast track. The success of the disability movement is extraordinary because it sprang up with little noise and little notice. One essential ingredient has been the growth of a new class consciousness among the disabled. Seventy-four percent of them feel they share a “common identity” with other disabled people, and 45 percent argue that they are “a minority in the same sense as are blacks and Hispanics,” according to a 1985 poll by Louis Harris & Associates. “All disabled people share one common experience—discrimination,” says Pat Wright of the Disability Rights, Education and Defense Fund. Often it is crude bigotry. In January, an airline employee in New York who resented having to help a 66-year-old double amputee board a plane instead threw him on a baggage dolly. A New Jersey private-zoo owner a few summers ago refused to admit children with Down syndrome to the monkey house because, he claimed, they upset his chimpanzees. It is that kind of outrage and countless more subtle discriminations that fueled the movement that now wants to change the image of the disabled. Many now reject the traditional attitudes of society that suggested their lives were tragic and pitiful. Many now loathe charitable appeals such as the annual Jerry Lewis Telethon that raised $42 million for the Muscular Dystrophy Association over Labor Day weekend. Such extravaganzas seek funds by emphasizing the most desperate cases. That kind of approach, activists say, suggests that disabled people are to be cared for and cannot be contributing members of society. “We don’t want to be dependent any more,” says Lex Friedan of the Institute for Rehabilitation and Research Foundation in Houston, who is a quadriplegic wheelchair user, the result of an automobile accident. “We want to be part of society in every way.” Such new attitudes reflect fundamental changes in the lives of disabled people. Since 1975, when federal law first ensured all disabled children access to schools, hundreds of thousands of disabled students have gotten a better education alongside nondisabled peers. Many grew frustrated after college, when they found there were few such protections to help once they tried to find jobs. A recent Census Bureau study concluded that the gap between the earnings of disabled and their nondisabled co-workers is growing. A disabled worker in 1987 made only 64 percent of what his nondisabled colleagues earned. In 1980, it was 77 percent. The 1985 Harris survey found that 70 percent of working-age disabled people were unemployed. Of those, two thirds said they wanted to work but were prevented from doing so because, among other reasons, they faced discrimination in hiring or lacked transportation. Those who do not work now collect federal disability and welfare checks, costing nearly $60 billion a year. “It doesn’t make sense to maintain people in a dependency state when those people want to be productive, tax-paying citizens,” argues Jay Rochlin of the President’s Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities. Although no one knows precisely how many millions of dollars could be saved by bringing the disabled fully into the work force, Sylvia Piper, an Ankeny, Iowa, mother, says she saved taxpayers $4.8 million by ignoring physicians who urged her to institutionalize her retarded son, Dan, when he was born. Instead, she kept him at home and sent him to public school with non-disabled children, the kind of role models who inspired him to get a job this summer. Dan, now 18, saved $800 from his pay as a drugstore stockroom worker. His first purchase was a gray bedroom rug, upon which he slept the night it arrived. The next morning he was ready for work early and announced, “I've got to work harder and make more money." Once again, says his delighted mother, Dan grew when faced with a challenge. The nation’s changing demographics have added to the urgency of meeting the needs of the disabled. By 1990, there will be 6.2 million elderly Americans with one or more basic disabilities, up from almost 5 million in 1984, according to estimates by the Urban Institute, a research organization. And the explosive growth of the number of those with AIDS and HIV infection has already added hundreds of thousands more disabled to the population. That is why AIDS-policy advocates teamed up with disability groups to make sure civil-rights guarantees under the bill also applied to those with AIDS. People with AIDS had won federal court rulings protecting them under existing disability-rights laws, which apply only to federally funded programs. The new bill will expand that protection to the private sector, so that people with AIDS and HIV infection cannot be fired from jobs or denied service in restaurants. [Subheading] Galvanizing Issue. Along with being better educated and more independent, the new generation of disabled people has become more politically sophisticated. Some 200 independent-living centers, which have sprung up since the 1970s to provide a mix of counseling and support services to severely disabled people, became bases of advocacy. One galvanizing issue came in the early 19805, when a Reagan administration anti-regulation effort tried to eliminate key federal protections that prohibit discrimination by any program or contractor receiving federal funds. Negotiating sessions over the regulation first brought then Vice President Bush face-to-face with Evan Kemp, who headed Ralph Nader’s Disability Rights Center. The regulation was never changed, in part because of Kemp’s advocacy and growing friendship with Bush. Last week, the President named Kemp, a member of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission since 1987, to chair the civil-rights agency, which will handle job-discrimination cases brought under the new law. The disability-rights movement is distinctive, too, because it has never had a Martin Luther King or a Betty Friedan to lead it. Part of the reason is that there are hundreds of different disabilities. Nonetheless, disabled people, such as student protesters who last year gave Gallaudet University its first deaf president, I. King Jordan, are now adopting on a small scale the protest tactics of the civil-rights movement. Thirty members of American Disabled for Accessible Public Transportation, which uses tactics of civil disobedience, on Labor Day backed their wheelchairs against buses at the Los Angeles Greyhound terminal and disrupted busy holiday traffic in a protest for wheelchair lifts on buses. As the historic legislation was being debated, there was a curious twist. Watching with interest was a paraplegic visitor from Moscow, Ilya Zaslavski. He made history earlier this year when he won election to the new Soviet national legislature, the first person anywhere in the world to run as a disability candidate. Zaslavski watched the work of Congress and announced plans to introduce SDA—-a Soviets with Disabilities Act. INSERTED TEXT BOX: THE COST FACTOR Businesses are concerned about the costs imposed by the civil-rights bill: BUILDINGS: The cost of making accessible new buildings and those existing structures that are undergoing major renovations runs between 0 and 1 percent of building costs. TRANSIT: Changes required of bus and transit systems to help the disabled over the next 20 years might cost several hundred million dollars. PHONES: It will cost $250 million to $300 million a year to hire operators to work relay systems so deaf people can communicate with those who can hear, according to federal and AT&T estimates. INSERT: PHOTO (Roberta Barnes -- San Antonio Light): A line of people in wheelchairs diagonally crosses the picture. In the front Lonnie Smith Archuleta with his buff physique, in a T-Shirt with a medal-like imprint on the front, wheels his sports chair. Behind him a slight woman (Diane Coleman) with very thin arms and leg braces on her extended legs, rolls her power chair with a flag attached. She wears a straw hat, red ADAPT no steps T-shirt and long red skirt, across which she wears a sign reading "Gentler -n- kinder nation??" Behind her another woman in a power wheelchair (Linda Johnstone) wears a different red ADAPT T-shirt and a sign across her knees reads "We Need a Ride To Work." Behind her is another large woman in a wheelchair (Mary Kay Sanders) in dark sunglasses and a white dress; she carries a white parasol and appears to be chanting. Over the top of the parasol another sign (held by someone walking but obscured from view) written in calligraphy can be seen: "Access is a Civil Right." The line bends back and around out of view. Caption reads: Countless Frustrations. Angry protesters in San Antonio wheel through the streets to protest the lack of accessible public transportation.