When is a difference a disability? (Part 2)

Definitions and labels are tricky things.  The word handicapped is rarely used any more because of the negative connotations associated with it.  At one time, however, it was considered a positive replacement for the words lame or crippled.  Now handicapped has largely been replaced by disabled.  This change was even reflected in legislation in the United States when the 1975 Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA)  was renamed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in 1990.  If you are under the impression that that term disabled has mostly positive connotations, however, watch the first few minutes of this TED Talk by Aimee Mullins:

One can see that there is a tendency for the terms which replace politically incorrect terms to become tainted by the connotations of the previous ones. Steven Pinker refers to this as "the Euphemism Treadmill." It shows up clearly in the progression of terms used for persons with physical handicaps, where terms like physically challenged, differently abled, and people with disabilities have been proposed to replace the term disabled.  A similar progression has occurred in the terms used to describe cognitive or developmental delays, with the terms idiot, imbecile, and moron being replaced by mentally retarded.  That term eventually also became pejorative and was replaced with others like mentally challenged, intellectual disability, learning difficulties, and special education.  If we take history to be our guide, it seems quite possible that these new, politically correct terms will also become the insults of tomorrow.  I know that I already hear the terms special and different often being used in a mocking tone.

I don't believe that it is just the negative associations of the words themselves, however, that lead to their replacement.  I agree with Aimee that the words themselves can have qualities that lead us to think and act a certain way.  As she explains:

"It's about what we believe about people when we name them with these words.  It's about the values behind the words, and how we construct those values."

I am sympathetic to the values and intentions behind the more recent terminology. I also understand that they also have their limitations.

There has been an attempt, with words like difficulties and challenged, to move away from emphasis on the absence of ability towards language which allows possibility.  That seems very promising to me.  Are these terms specific enough, however?  Do they sufficiently express the extent of the impact of more severe conditions on the lives of affected individuals?  Not all those who are affected agree.

I also can also appreciate the desire to use People-first Language, (i.e. people with disabilities) rather than use language that emphasizes the disability (i.e. disabled person).  I also know that this language has been criticized for separating the person's identity from their trait or condition (by using the word with in-between the person and the condition), implying that trait is somehow bad or lesser.  This doesn't sit well with those who wish to identify with their distinctive traits, such as those who identify with the Deaf culture and the Autism Rights Movement. Others criticize  the term as being awkward and thus drawing undue negative attention to the condition.

Either way, one can see that it is a challenge to find terms which adequately communicate the intended meaning without conveying unintended negative ones.

In both the terms people with disabilities and intellectual disabilities, you can also see that it has been hard to leave the term disability completely behind.  It has been carefully defined in law and in documents by various jurisdictions and organizations.   In the United States, for example, IDEA remains in force, having been updated and revised a couple of times, and the term disability has become all tied up with issues of funding and qualifications and requirements for programs and equipment. This is also true in many other countries.  It seems to me, then, that it has become less a decision of whether or not to use terms like disabled and disability, but when and how to use them sensitively and respectfully.

In the mean time, Aimee has come up with her own way of handling the issue.  She uses disable in its verb form, and she makes up her own improved thesaurus entry:

Disable, (verb). 

To crush a spirit, to withdraw hope, to deflate curiosity, to promote an inability to see beauty, to deprive of imagination. To make abject.
Ant. to make poss-able

When is a difference a disability? (Part 1)

Dean Zimmer may not be a household name, but he is a great rock and roll drummer.  His drumming style is tight, passionate and musical, and apparently his band has opened for Foghat, Eddie Money, Paul Rogers, Styx, Kansas and Thin Lizzy.  He also has a physical condition that some would call a disability.  Watch him play in this 6-minute documentary, "Drummer Wanted," and see whether or not you would classify him as person with a disability:

 

"He is not handicapped - he is different," 

says his bandmate Rick Abbott.  Dean certainly is different from most drummers.  He holds the sticks differently and has them strapped to his arms.  He moves his body a lot more while playing, rather than just moving his arms and legs.  According to Rick, Dean's limitations contribute to his unique sound.  But is his condition a handicap?  According to the Oxford Dictionaries website definition,

a handicap is "a condition that markedly restricts a person’s ability to function physically, mentally, or socially."  

Is Dean's functioning markedly restricted?  It sure doesn't stop him from playing the drums!  Yes, Dean uses a wheelchair to get around much of the time.  According to The Los Angeles Times, he has a rare congenital disorder called arthrogryposis that makes it difficult to move his joints.  In the video, however, we see Dean driving, climbing, moving around and setting up his drum kit.  Rick claims that Dean can do anything anyone else can do, although it sometimes takes him longer.  I must admit that I had some difficulty understanding some of what Dean was saying at first, but I was able to understand him pretty well on second listen.

Does any of that meet the definition of handicapped?