Challanging Disabilities - Term Paper Example

Challenging Disabilities Introduction: Nobody wants to be born blind, deaf, or lame. No person would want to be impaired. Everybody wants to be just like everybody else in a way that he or she can do what everybody does, that is the ideal. Sadly, sometimes the ideal does not happen; disabilities occur, and when it does the society is faced with the challenge of what it is going to do. To people with disabilities, the challenge is how to live like a normal person as much as possible; normal in a way that he or she could fulfill the daily activities independently. To those who are without disabilities, the challenge is to give people with disabilities chance to prove their worth as equally important human beings (http://www.open.ac.uk/inclusiveteaching/pages/legal-and-professional-requirements/reasonable-adjustments.php). Language and Disability: People with disabilities are being portrayed and seen as helpless people, to be pitied and cared for. Many people are often times embarrassed about disability and have come up with words to describe it. People with disabilities are often being described with words that are derogatory like mongoloid, cripple, deaf and dumb, or retarded. These words are rude and focus on the disability instead of focusing on the person. There are acceptable words that can be used to refer people with disability. Acceptable alternatives are ‘person with mobility impairment’, ‘person with down syndrome’, person with hearing and speech disability, and ‘person with intellectual disability’ (http://www.equity.uts.edu.au/policy/language/ablist.html). “Language both reflect and shape social reality” (http://www.equity.uts.edu.au/policy/language/index.html). It is therefore of utmost importance how the language reflect how disabilities are perceived and understood. Norwich’s Dilemma: For decades governments have been trying to promote equality for all citizens. Discrimination is utterly discouraged and efforts have been made to foster unity and equality. In trying to achieve this noble goal, policies were made to protect the right of every individual regardless of gender, color, and ethnic backgrounds. The same is true with people who have disabilities. But looking at these people’s needs are sometimes more complex than it seems. In the present educational system ‘inclusion’ is the prevalent code of practice. The Special Educational Needs and Disability Act 2001 amended the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA) to make it unlawful for education providers to discriminate against disabled pupils, students and adult learners; and to make sure disabled people are not disadvantaged in comparison with people who are not disabled (http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/DisabledPeople/RightsAndObligations/DG_4019061). Norwich’s dilemma however is pointing to the complexity of matter. His position on the matter of approach is on the dilemma of difference1. One example in his book “Dilemmas of difference, inclusion, and disability-international perspective” is the case of Amy Rowley. 2Amy Rowley was a student with hearing impairment who went to a publicly funded regular school that assured her under the federal legislation of free ‘appropriate public education’ for all ‘handicapped children’. Being part of her individual educational plan (IEP), her regular classroom participation was supplemented with an hour of teaching from a tutor, and three hours of speech therapy in a week. There was an objection from her parents pointing that the plan did not give Amy ‘appropriate education’ because what was suitable for her was a sign language interpreter for all her classes. The court judge decided to give Amy what was required for her and the IEP provided her some educational benefits. However the parents and the authorities agreed that the problem has been Amy’s, simply because she was different; therefore in this case the dilemma of difference was obvious (Norwich, 2008). It was probably more beneficial for her if she went to a special school for hearing impaired as some advocated, and it could have probably provided her with more positive social experience. However under the Government policy this action was not appropriate since it has stipulated regular class provision to the maximum extent possible and Amy has progressed in the regular class so exclusive provision was not acceptable either3. The federal government has been very supportive on people who have disability. The legislation has been generous on making sure that all students with impairments would be treated equally as those without. That they should be given equal opportunity to learn and that physical environment should not be a hindrance to their learning. Improvement on the way information is delivered to them, and there is the increase access to the curriculum which could mean ‘changes to teaching and learning arrangements’, ‘classroom organization’, and ‘time tabling and support from other students’ (http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/DisabledPeople/EducationAndTraining/Schools/DG_10013035). These accommodations are meant to encourage students with disabilities to move and fit into the mainstream education. Nevertheless the fact still remains that there is a difference between normal regular students and the students with disabilities. This is a fact that cannot be denied just like the fact that there are students with different religious backgrounds, and also there are students with language difficulty because English is not their native tongue. Acknowledging these dilemmas of difference can cater to better understanding the real situation without the stigmatizing effect of being labeled negatively. The same could be true with people who are disabled (Norwich, 2008). It is okay to be different: “I suppose I get treated differently now and again, I think that’s a good thing and I sometimes feel it’s a bad thing. I mean obviously I want to be treated the same, but sometimes I’d like to be treated differently…I like to be asked”4. – 14-year-old boy with degenerative neuromascular condition People are different in many aspects. It is a truth in life. It is not bad to be different. Negative feelings come from wrong assumption that different is bad. Martha Minnow as quoted in the book of Norwich suggests that difference should be seen on its intrinsic value and not in terms of comparison (Norwich, 2008). There are two ways to view people with disabilities, under medical model they are viewed or defined by their medical condition. Therefore they are people to be pitied, they are powerless, and unfortunately under this view they are justifiably and systematically excluded from society (http://www.open.ac.uk/inclusiveteaching/pages/understanding-and-awareness/medical-model.php). From this view people with disability are seen to be different in a very negative way, and this could result into people hiding their disability. Take the case of Helen, an Adult Nursing Student at Southampton University who was diagnosed with dyslexia and has hidden it for a year (http://www.open.ac.uk/inclusiveteaching/pages/identifying-a-students-needs/encouraging-disclosure-of-a-disability.php). It was not probably the scenario if being with disability is not viewed as a weakness. The second view or model is called social model. This model has been developed by people with disabilities in reaction to the negative impact of medical model on their lives. Under this model disability is seen as byproduct of the society’s negative take on disability that has lead to discrimination. To remove this prejudice it requires a change of the way the society think and organized. This model promotes the participation of people with disability in economic, environmental and cultural society. From social model point of view, hindrances that prevent them from playing their part in the society are the problem and not the individual. The negative media portrayal of people with disabilities acts also as a barrier. (http://www.open.ac.uk/inclusiveteaching/pages/understanding-and-awareness/social-model.php). The social model has been fundamental in establishing the anti-discriminatory legislation and has a huge impact on the way people with disabilities are being viewed and treated today. One example is that the concept that a person using a wheelchair is not disable in an environment where he can use public transport and has full access in building and facilities just like everybody else. The idea of inclusion came from this model. However, academics and some disable people are now considering the re-evaluation of social model and thinking about moving from this basic position (http://www.open.ac.uk/inclusiveteaching/pages/understanding-and-awareness/social-model.php). Every individual has different experiences and every individual can arrive at different conclusion or interpretation of things depending on the following factors: upbringing; cultural and religious background; previous experiences; personality; experience of discrimination; kind of impairment and whether the impairment is progressive (http://www.open.ac.uk/inclusiveteaching/pages/understanding-and-awareness/experiences-of-disability.php). It is therefore clear that everybody is different and requiring different approach. Thus to be able to meet the different level of needs of the students requires an ample amount of sensitivity from the academics. Determining every possible need is a huge challenge. There are disabilities that are not visible, and a lecturer or teacher cannot know until it is evident on the written work. Though the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) has required institutions systems to facilitate disclosure of disability so that it can be passed on to the staff that need to know, some students opt not to disclose in fear of being rejected and being labeled different (http://www.open.ac.uk/inclusiveteaching/pages/identifying-a-students-needs/using-existing-institutional-information-systems.php). How can the special educational needs are going to be met? “On the face of things, therefore, England would appear to be a country that is moving rapidly along the path to full inclusion” (Dyson, 2005). In spite of the fact that the governments through policies have tried to come up with what is best solution to meet the special needs of people with disabilities, there are still questions raised on how it is being done and is it truly meeting the needs? The Disability Rights Commission (DRC) was created by the Disability Rights Commission Act (DRCA) 1999. The DRC has itself has set a vision “"A society where all disabled persons can participate fully as equal citizens" (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmselect/cmeduski/uc478-iv/uc47802m.htm). In order to achieve this objective there is a need for successful implementation of the disability equality duty as stated in the Discrimination Act 2005, which has required a responsibility on all public authorities to foster equality for people with disabilities (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmselect/cmeduski/uc478-iv/uc47802m.htm). It has been pointed out also the necessity to address the shortfalls and difficulties in mainstream provision to improve value of social experience of people with disability. Low quality outcome from mainstream schools as the basis of support is not acceptable. The success of the delivery of SEN should be based on the effect on participation and development of children with SEN and children with disability. This is not only to measure the success of the system in meeting the needs, but first and foremost it is to promote full participation in supporting children and young people in reaching their full potential. The DRC believes that the main key in demolishing discrimination in the society is the full implementation of inclusion. The DRC also supports the presumption of SENDA that the mainstream education is the best preference for all students unless otherwise it is against the student’s or the parents’ wishes or the mainstream education will not meet the specific needs of a child. Providers of school education are under a legal obligation to plan to increase the accessibility for children with disability in schools. This legal obligation covers both adjustments and improvements for physical access even for children with sensory disability, and for access to curriculum. It has stated also comprehensive and enforceable rights for people with impairments or disabilities in advance, higher and LEA-secured adult education. It includes access to provision services of organizations providing education, social, cultural and recreational activities and physical education and training facilities (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmselect/cmeduski/uc478-iv/uc47802m.htm). “The rights conferred by education legislation for pupils to have their special educational needs identified and met, and in England and Wales, the right to appeal to the Special Educational Needs Tribunal, were maintained” (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmselect/cmeduski/uc478-iv/uc47802m.htm). These recommendations became legislation under The Special Educational Needs and Disability Act 2001 (SENDA). It has been determined that not all students and pupils with disability have learning difficulties or SEN. On the other hand not all students and pupils with learning difficulties or SEN are thought to be disabled. Determining who is who with regards to who really has legitimate needs has a tremendous impact on meeting the need of these students and pupils. However there has been an indication that DDA and SEN Framework are not complementing each other on meeting the true needs. A fundamental issue is the difference between two systems in their way of thinking. The SEN emphasis is on ‘meeting the needs’ while the DDA is inclined more on making ‘reasonable adjustments’ (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmselect/cmeduski/uc478-iv/uc47802m.htm). Reasonable adjustments are based on the individual circumstances and also on the budget of an institution as a whole (http://www.open.ac.uk/inclusiveteaching/pages/legal-and-professional-requirements/reasonable-adjustments.php). It also involves health and safety reasons, and relevant interest of other people5. Example – a student with disability requests a five minute break every 20 minutes because she could no longer focus after this, the tutor may think that by giving in to this particular need of a person, the whole class would be disadvantaged since the time would not cover all the material needed for the class. It might be reasonable instead to reduce lunch breaks and to have breaks every 45 minutes. One good adjustment to be made is to provide the student with tape of the session and with full notes. Example – A student with hearing impairment that is assigned to a small group may require a BSL interpreter. The other students in the group may complain that working with an interpreter takes longer and therefore this is disadvantageous with the other students. However the disadvantage would be mild, and by working more slowly waiting for the interpreter there is a better chance for all to contribute to the session. Making reasonable adjustments according to DDA standards are to be set in the framework of anticipatory adjustments that the institution has placed. One example is to give an individual student extension to the deadline of an assignment (http://www.open.ac.uk/inclusiveteaching/pages/legal-and-professional-requirements/reasonable-adjustments.php). Conclusion: Treating people with disability has improved already tremendously over the years, and authorities are trying very hard to achieve what is acceptable according to international standards. Though there are still many things to be examined and to be tested; research and studies that has been going on can surely help in the future adjustments, especially that people with disabilities are involved in making this thing happen. References: Dyson, Alan (2009). PHILOSOPHY, POLITICS AND ECONOMICS? THE STORY OF INCLUSIVE EDUCATION IN ENGLAND. Date accessed: November 30, 2009 at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmselect/cmeduski/uc478-vi/uc47802m.htm Norwich,Brahm (2008). “Dilemmas of difference, inclusion, and disability-international perspective”. Date accessed: November 30, 2009 at http://books.google.com.ph/books?id=uUt3qCgPXDcC&printsec=frontcover&hl=en#v=onepage&q=&f=false Other internet sources: http://www.open.ac.uk/inclusiveteaching/pages/legal-and-professional-requirements/reasonable-adjustments.php http://www.equity.uts.edu.au/policy/language/ablist.html http://www.equity.uts.edu.au/policy/language/index.html http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/DisabledPeople/RightsAndObligations/DG_4019061 http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/DisabledPeople/EducationAndTraining/Schools/DG_10013035 http://www.open.ac.uk/inclusiveteaching/pages/understanding-and-awareness/medical-model.php http://www.open.ac.uk/inclusiveteaching/pages/identifying-a-students-needs/encouraging-disclosure-of-a-disability.php) http://www.open.ac.uk/inclusiveteaching/pages/understanding-and-awareness/social-model.php http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmselect/cmeduski/uc478-iv/uc47802m.htm http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/DisabledPeople/EducationAndTraining/Schools/DG_10013035 http://www.open.ac.uk/inclusiveteaching/pages/understanding-and-awareness/medical-model.php http://www.open.ac.uk/inclusiveteaching/pages/identifying-a-students-needs/using-existing-institutional-information-systems.php http://www.open.ac.uk/inclusiveteaching/pages/legal-and-professional-requirements/reasonable-adjustments.php Read More