Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: Rationalisation is at hand!

207 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 5 6 7 8 9 Newer→ Last

  • Sacha,

    Steve, you're correctly reflecting the stereotype that disabled people couldn't possibly run their own lives.

    National surveys linked to the Census show that of the one in five New Zealanders who are disabled (yes, 20%), about half use no support services or equipment at all. Only about one in forty Kiwis need daily support - but even then they are perfectly capable in many areas of life (including voting).

    Government is not investing in challenging those fundamental stereotypes that limit expectations for all of us. It would only take the same $5m that is spent on Like Minds each year.

    Barriers also need to be removed (like polling booths you can't get into or forms you can't read), and there simply needs to be more support when it's needed. Parents like Hilary and Russell can tell you all about the current rationing.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19745 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Steve, I acknowledge your overall support but that post was about your assumption that "many" disabled people can't run their own lives.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19745 posts Report Reply

  • Hilary Stace,

    Just to keep this discussion going I have just read the National Party education crusade stuff and see the way they are going to get around having to include kids with special ed needs in their testing results league tables is to force them out of the mainstream schools and into more special schools or satellites. Now how many kids would chose an exclusionary education if anyone gave them the choice? Roll on the vote for disabled children. (Warning I will probably go on about this a bit more in the next month)

    Wgtn • Since Jun 2008 • 3229 posts Report Reply

  • Steve Parks,

    Sacha, I understand your desire to make your point, but…

    Steve, you're correctly reflecting the stereotype that disabled people couldn't possibly run their own lives.

    …that’s just not what I said. I didn’t say all disabled people couldn’t possibly run their own lives, or even that most disabled people can’t run their own lives. In fact, I even put the phrase “run their own lives” in quotation marks and followed it with a caveat, as it was in the context of what some one else said earlier. In reference to under-18s, Lucy wrote (emphasis added):

    If they're not old enough to run their own lives, they're sure as hell not old enough to decide who runs the country.

    Hence me:

    Many disabled people cannot “run their own lives” (at least, any more than some 17 year olds) but are allowed to vote - and so they should be.

    Notice also the caveat “any more so than 17 year olds”. My point is simply that disabled people, quite rightly, can vote. Yet some of them (and some older people, for that matter) would be considered to be unable to run their own lives if the standard of such is set at what we expect of 16 & 17 year olds. And remember, that’s a pretty high standard: we expect them to be able to make decisions about whether they have sex, and we treat 17 year olds as adults when it comes to criminal prosecution. I’m saying the idea that 16 and (especially) 17 year olds are not capable of running their own lives and therefore should get to vote pretty specious.

    Only about one in forty Kiwis need daily support - but even then they are perfectly capable in many areas of life (including voting).

    Entirely agree.

    Wellington • Since May 2007 • 1165 posts Report Reply

  • Steve Parks,

    "...and therefore should not get to vote is pretty specious." was what I meant.

    Wellington • Since May 2007 • 1165 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Steve, my apologies. I added that second post cos I realised I'd pushed your position a bit too far. Should have slept on it.

    You'll notice the difference between saying "many" in your original post and "some" in the one above. I heard "many" as closer to "most", when perhaps you meant it as closer to "some".

    That's all I was getting at - that the reality doesn't match the stereotype of widespread incompetence and helplessness. I'm not blaming you for that, as there's hardly any publicity about the true numbers.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19745 posts Report Reply

  • Steve Parks,

    "...there's hardly any publicity about the true numbers."

    That's true, and I found your stats above interesting - I didn't know the numbers myself. (And in hindsight "some" is better as it's clearer.)

    Wellington • Since May 2007 • 1165 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 5 6 7 8 9 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.