On November 14, Jamie Fallon and Nazih Kheir squared off in what supposedly was the first professional boxing match for fighters of short stature. The match was in Australia, which in the past has been home to dwarf tossing, now banned in several states in the United States. The fight was originally cancelled because officials feared the match was nothing more than a gimmick, similar to dwarf tossing. But the fighters, their crews, and the promotors insist the fight is legitimate. They've trained hard, over many months, to box, not entertain. And that's what they do. They box; they don't put on a sideshow, unlike outfits in the United States such as the pint-size-brawlers, who objectify and degrade their stature in order to draw an audience, (leading the crowd in chants of "midget, midget, midget . . ." before an event and asking the crowd "who wants to see a midget bleed. Click here for a report written by a university student on campus where a midget wrestling troupe made a recent appearance). In fact, officials are pursuing paperwork to create a professional league specifically for boxers of short stature.
I hope the boxers are successful, and hope the attempt to create a league is successful as well. Whether it be boxing, wrestling, or any other sport, anybody has the right to pursue their interest in the sport, whether the person be short stature or non-short statured.
Common Ground: Commentary from the far side of Chicago
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Friday, November 14, 2008
landmark victory for people with disabilities
Yesterday, the disability community scored a huge victory when a class of people with developmental disabilities entered into a settlement agreement with the State of Illinois that will open up community services for thousands of individuals who have been trapped in institutions.
The Americans with Disabilities Act, signed by George H.W. Bush in 1990, delivered to people with disabilities the right to receive long-term care services in the most integrated setting. Under the law, and under the 1999 Olmstead Supreme Court Ruling, people with disabilities have the right to receive services in either an institutional or a community based setting. While many other states have implemented the ADA's integration mandate, Illinois lags far behind. Thousands of people are forced to live in institutions because community options don't exist. In institutions, people not only lose the chance to pursue educational, employment and social opportunities offered in the community at-large, they lose control over basic decisions, such as when to get up, what to eat, what to do during the day.
In 2005, a coalition of groups filed a complaint against the state of Illinois on behalf of people with developmental disabilities living in Intermediate Care Facilities. Yesterday, the two parties agreed to a settlement. This was a significant step toward realizing the promise of the ADA and Olmstead. Under terms of the agreement, over the course of nine years, thousands of people with disabilities living in institutions who want out will get the opportunity to live in the community.
Still today, as our world becomes more inclusive, people with disabilities struggle with the stigma and reality of segregation and discrimination. This legal victory brings the community a bit closer to reversing that reality.
To to read the news release issued by the groups representing the disability community, visit
http://www.accessliving.org/LigasSettlementAnnouncement-11-2008.htm
The Americans with Disabilities Act, signed by George H.W. Bush in 1990, delivered to people with disabilities the right to receive long-term care services in the most integrated setting. Under the law, and under the 1999 Olmstead Supreme Court Ruling, people with disabilities have the right to receive services in either an institutional or a community based setting. While many other states have implemented the ADA's integration mandate, Illinois lags far behind. Thousands of people are forced to live in institutions because community options don't exist. In institutions, people not only lose the chance to pursue educational, employment and social opportunities offered in the community at-large, they lose control over basic decisions, such as when to get up, what to eat, what to do during the day.
In 2005, a coalition of groups filed a complaint against the state of Illinois on behalf of people with developmental disabilities living in Intermediate Care Facilities. Yesterday, the two parties agreed to a settlement. This was a significant step toward realizing the promise of the ADA and Olmstead. Under terms of the agreement, over the course of nine years, thousands of people with disabilities living in institutions who want out will get the opportunity to live in the community.
Still today, as our world becomes more inclusive, people with disabilities struggle with the stigma and reality of segregation and discrimination. This legal victory brings the community a bit closer to reversing that reality.
To to read the news release issued by the groups representing the disability community, visit
http://www.accessliving.org/LigasSettlementAnnouncement-11-2008.htm
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Words to live by
Late the night of November 4, 2008, standing before thousands of supporters in Grant Park, and speaking before millions around the world, during what for many people was the most exciting political evening of their lives, President Elect Barack Obama said the word disability. Early in the much anticipated acceptance speech, Obama said “It's the answer spoken by young and old, rich and poor, Democrat and Republican, black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, gay, straight, disabled and not disabled.” Disabled was one word sandwiched among many others designed to send a message of inclusivity, but the word spoke volumes.
On paper, Obama had always been the better disability candidate, offering a detailed platform on issues regarding people with disabilities, including co-sponsorship of the Community Choice Act, support for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and sponsorship of the 2007 Mental Health Parity Act. McCain has failed to support the Community Choice Act, has voted against refunding of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and proposed a health plan that would eliminate Mental Health Parity in 45 states. Also, Obama’s Health Care plan would prohibit insurance companies from denying coverage to people with preexisting conditions, an issue very important to many people of short stature, some of whom have been denied coverage because of dwarfism. McCain’s health plan does not prohibit insurance companies from discriminating against people with pre-existing conditions.
Though Obama’s platform included support of issues important within the disability community, he had failed to stimulate public consciousness around disability, and had failed to rally the disability community under the banner of civil rights. For years, disability advocates nationwide had urged political leaders to change the landscape of disability issues by shifting the focus of disability from special needs to civil rights. For as long as disability remained a special needs issues, then programs and services designed around disability would carry the stigma of charity and the reality of segregation. But the rights of people with disabilities are not charity. They are civil rights, deserving of the same attention as the rights of other social minority groups who have fought for their place within the country’s social and political culture.
Before the Democratic National Convention in Denver, Chicago ADAPT, a grassroots disability rights group, met with Kareem Dale, Obama’s National Disability Vote Director. Through Dale, ADAPT urged Obama to go beyond support for the issues by incorporating disability in his speech at the Denver Convention speech or by inviting a person with a visible disability to speak in prime time at the convention. On the final night in Denver, a rumor spread that a woman in a wheelchair would be among the group of people invited onto the stage following Obama’s nomination acceptance, but there was no one with a visible disability on stage, nor was there any mention of disability in prime time.
One day after the Democratic National Convention, Senator John McCain introduced Governor Sarah Palin as his Vice Presidential running mate. Overnight, the Republicans did what the Democrats would not, bring national attention to disability. The country soon learned about Trig Palin, the Governor’s four-month-old son with Down Syndrome. While Palin embraced her child, positively presenting disability as an issue that touches us all at some point in our lives, the Republican’s message underscored archaic attitudes toward disability. Rather than present people with disabilities as a social group with civil rights similar to those of other protected classes, Palin, at the convention and elsewhere, spoke publicly about her support of children with “special needs.” The message “special needs” reinforced traditional stereotypes that people with disabilities are a class in need of the country’s pity and charity. Though public exposure of disability generated some hope, McCain’s poor record combined with Palin’s antiquated message made it clear that if the Republicans were to affect the disability movement in any way, the movement would be backwards, not forwards.
As the campaign dragged on toward November 4, Joe the Plumber drowned out disability in the Republican camp. The Democrats remained silent. Then, on Election Night, the nation voted Obama into office. When he took the stage in Grant Park, Obama’s brief mention of disability released a wave of emotion within me. My body shivered and I yelled with delight, high fiving my future wife, who sat next to me on the couch and was just as thrilled. The next day at Access Living, a disability group where I work, conversations revealed that others felt the same way. All day long, I overheard people exclaim triumphantly, “Did you hear him? He said disabled and non-disabled!”
Disabled is just a word. But within the boundaries of groups struggling for independence and empowerment, words carry enough weight to either drag down or support a community. Uttered from President-elect Obama’s lips on November 4, disabled sent a message of inclusivity and empowerment, identifying people with disabilities as one of the many threads that contribute to the fabric of our society and deserving of the benefits, protections, rights and opportunities our society offers.
On paper, Obama had always been the better disability candidate, offering a detailed platform on issues regarding people with disabilities, including co-sponsorship of the Community Choice Act, support for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and sponsorship of the 2007 Mental Health Parity Act. McCain has failed to support the Community Choice Act, has voted against refunding of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and proposed a health plan that would eliminate Mental Health Parity in 45 states. Also, Obama’s Health Care plan would prohibit insurance companies from denying coverage to people with preexisting conditions, an issue very important to many people of short stature, some of whom have been denied coverage because of dwarfism. McCain’s health plan does not prohibit insurance companies from discriminating against people with pre-existing conditions.
Though Obama’s platform included support of issues important within the disability community, he had failed to stimulate public consciousness around disability, and had failed to rally the disability community under the banner of civil rights. For years, disability advocates nationwide had urged political leaders to change the landscape of disability issues by shifting the focus of disability from special needs to civil rights. For as long as disability remained a special needs issues, then programs and services designed around disability would carry the stigma of charity and the reality of segregation. But the rights of people with disabilities are not charity. They are civil rights, deserving of the same attention as the rights of other social minority groups who have fought for their place within the country’s social and political culture.
Before the Democratic National Convention in Denver, Chicago ADAPT, a grassroots disability rights group, met with Kareem Dale, Obama’s National Disability Vote Director. Through Dale, ADAPT urged Obama to go beyond support for the issues by incorporating disability in his speech at the Denver Convention speech or by inviting a person with a visible disability to speak in prime time at the convention. On the final night in Denver, a rumor spread that a woman in a wheelchair would be among the group of people invited onto the stage following Obama’s nomination acceptance, but there was no one with a visible disability on stage, nor was there any mention of disability in prime time.
One day after the Democratic National Convention, Senator John McCain introduced Governor Sarah Palin as his Vice Presidential running mate. Overnight, the Republicans did what the Democrats would not, bring national attention to disability. The country soon learned about Trig Palin, the Governor’s four-month-old son with Down Syndrome. While Palin embraced her child, positively presenting disability as an issue that touches us all at some point in our lives, the Republican’s message underscored archaic attitudes toward disability. Rather than present people with disabilities as a social group with civil rights similar to those of other protected classes, Palin, at the convention and elsewhere, spoke publicly about her support of children with “special needs.” The message “special needs” reinforced traditional stereotypes that people with disabilities are a class in need of the country’s pity and charity. Though public exposure of disability generated some hope, McCain’s poor record combined with Palin’s antiquated message made it clear that if the Republicans were to affect the disability movement in any way, the movement would be backwards, not forwards.
As the campaign dragged on toward November 4, Joe the Plumber drowned out disability in the Republican camp. The Democrats remained silent. Then, on Election Night, the nation voted Obama into office. When he took the stage in Grant Park, Obama’s brief mention of disability released a wave of emotion within me. My body shivered and I yelled with delight, high fiving my future wife, who sat next to me on the couch and was just as thrilled. The next day at Access Living, a disability group where I work, conversations revealed that others felt the same way. All day long, I overheard people exclaim triumphantly, “Did you hear him? He said disabled and non-disabled!”
Disabled is just a word. But within the boundaries of groups struggling for independence and empowerment, words carry enough weight to either drag down or support a community. Uttered from President-elect Obama’s lips on November 4, disabled sent a message of inclusivity and empowerment, identifying people with disabilities as one of the many threads that contribute to the fabric of our society and deserving of the benefits, protections, rights and opportunities our society offers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)