Disability rights movement

Not to be confused with Disability studies.

Part of a series on
Discrimination
General forms
General Ageism Caste Classism Colorism Genism Heightism Linguicism Lookism Mentalism Racism Rankism Religionism Sexism Sexualism Sizeism Speciesism Weightism
Specific forms
Social AIDS stigma Ableism Adultism Anti-albinism Anti-homelessness Anti-intellectualism Anti-left handedness Anti-Masonry Antigentilism Antisemitism Audism Biphobia Cronyism Elitism (academic) Ephebiphobia Fatism Gerontophobia Heteronormativity Heterophobia Heterosexism Homonegativity Homophobia Leprosy stigma Lesbophobia Misandry Misogyny Nepotism Pedophobia Reverse discrimination Sectarianism Surdophobia Transphobia Xenophobia
Manifestations Blood libel Compulsory sterilization Disability hate crime Economic Eliminationism Employment Ethnic cleansing Ethnic joke Ethnocide Forced conversion Freak show Gay bashing Gendercide Genocide (examples) Group libel Hate crime Hate speech Homeless dumping Housing Indian rolling LGBT hate crime Lynching Mortgage Murder Music Occupational segregation Pogrom Racist music Race war Religious persecution Scapegoating Slavery Trans-bashing Victimization Wife selling Witch-hunt
Policies Segregation age racial religious sex Age of candidacy Blood quantum Cleanliness of blood Apartheid Ethnocracy Gender roles Gerontocracy Ghetto benches Internment Jewish quota Jim Crow laws MSM blood donor controversy Numerus clausus (as religious or racial quota) Nuremberg Laws Racial quota Redlining Same-sex marriage (laws and issues prohibiting) Sodomy law Ugly law
Other forms Black supremacy Genetic Linguistic Pregnancy Supremacism White supremacy
Related topics Anti-cultural sentiment Bigotry Diversity Eugenics Multiculturalism Neurodiversity Oppression Police brutality Political correctness Prejudice Religious intolerance Religious persecution Stereotypes
Countermeasures
Countermeasures Affirmative action Cultural assimilation Racial integration Social integration
Discrimination portal

Although the concept of inclusion incorporates many of the fundamentals of the ideas present in disability rights, inclusion is a distinct social movement and should not be conflated with disability rights more generally.

The disability rights movement is the movement to secure equal opportunities and equal rights for people with disabilities. The specific goals and demands of the movement are: accessibility and safety in transportation, architecture, and the physical environment, equal opportunities in independent living, employment, education, and housing, and freedom from abuse, neglect, and violations of patients' rights. Effective civil rights legislation is sought in order to secure these opportunities and rights.

Floor marker for disabled people in Narita Airport, Japan

For people with physical disabilities accessibility and safety are primary issues that this movement works to reform. Access to public areas such as city streets and public buildings and restrooms are some of the more visible changes brought about in recent decades. A noticeable change in some parts of the world is the installation of elevators, automatic doors, wide doors and corridors, transit lifts, wheelchair ramps, curb cuts, and the elimination of unnecessary steps where ramps and elevators are not available, allowing people in wheelchairs and with other mobility impairments to use public sidewalks and public transit more easily and more safely.

Overview

Advocates for the rights of people with developmental disabilities focus their efforts on gaining acceptance in the workforce and in everyday activities and events from which they might have been excluded in the past. Unlike many of the leaders in the physical disability rights community, self-advocacy has been slow in developing for people with developmental disabilities. Public awareness of the civil rights movement for this population remains limited, and the stereotyping of people with developmental disabilities as non-contributing citizens who are dependent on others remains common.

Advocates for the rights of people with mental illnesses focus mainly on self-determination, and an individual’s ability to live independently.

The right to have an independent life, using paid assistant care instead of being institutionalized, if the individual wishes, is a major goal of the disability rights movement, and is the main goal of the similar independent living and self-advocacy movements, which are most strongly associated with people with intellectual disabilities and mental health disorders. These movements have supported people with disabilities to live as more active participants in society.

Access to education and employment have also been a major focus of the disability rights movement. Adaptive technologies, enabling people to work jobs they could not have previously, help create access to jobs and economic independence. Access in the classroom has helped improve education opportunities and independence for people with disabilities.

Freedom from abuse, neglect, and violations of patients' rights are also important goals of the disability rights movement. Abuse and neglect includes inappropriate seclusion and restraint, inappropriate use of force by staff and/or providers, threats, harassment and/or retaliation by staff or providers, failure to provide adequate nutrition, clothing, and/or medical and mental health care, and/or failure to provide a clean and safe living environment, as well as other issues which pose a serious threat to the physical and psychological well-being of a person with a disability. Violations of patients' rights include failure to obtain informed consent for treatment, failure to maintain the confidentiality of treatment records, and inappropriate restriction of the right to communicate and associate with others, as well as other restrictions of rights.

As a result of the work done through the disability rights movement, significant disability rights legislation was passed in the 1970s through the 1990s in the U.S.

History

Further information: Timeline of disability rights in the United States

The disability rights movement began in the 1960s, encouraged by the examples of the African-American civil rights and women’s rights movements.

It was at this time that disability rights advocacy began to have a cross-disability focus. People with different kinds of disabilities (physical and mental handicaps, along with visual- and hearing-impairments) and different essential needs came together to fight for a common cause.

In 1948, a watershed for the movement was the proof of the existence of physical and program barriers. The proof was provided as a specification for barrier free usable facilities for the handicap. The specifications provided the minimum requirements for barrier free physical and program access. An example of barriers are; providing only steps to enter buildings; lack of maintenance of walkways; locations not connected with public transit; lack of visual and hearing communications ends up segregating individuals with disabilities from independent, participation, and opportunities. The ANSI - Barrier Free Standard (phrase coined by Dr. Timothy J. Nugent, the lead investigator) called "ANSI A117.1, Making Buildings Accessible to and Usable by the Physically Handicapped", provides the indisputable proof that the barriers exist. It is based on disability ergonomic research conducted at the University of Illinois Urbana Champaign campus from 1946 to 1986. The research was codified in the ANSI A117.1 standard in 1961, 1971, 1980, and 1986. The standard is the outcome of physical therapists, bio-mechanical engineers, and individuals with disabilities who developed and participated in over 40 years of research. Easter Seals Education Committee Chairman Harold Wilke was tasked with assembling that diverse group in 1959. The standard provides the criteria for modifying programs and the physical site to provide independence. Applying the researched standards criteria presents reliable access and non-hazardous conditions. In October 2011 the standard turned 50 years old. The standard has been emulated globally since its introduction in Europe, Asia, Japan, Australia, and Canada, in the early 1960s.

One of the most important developments of the disability rights movement was the growth of the independent living movement, which emerged in California in the 1960s through the efforts of Edward Roberts and other wheelchair-using individuals. This movement, a subset of the disability rights movement, postulates that people with disabilities are the best experts on their needs, and therefore they must take the initiative, individually and collectively, in designing and promoting better solutions and must organize themselves for political power. Besides de-professionalization and self-representation, the independent living movement's ideology comprises de-medicalization of disability, de-institutionalization and cross-disability (i.e. inclusion in the independent living movement regardless of diagnoses).

In 1973 the (American) Rehabilitation Act became law; Sections 501, 503, and 504 prohibited discrimination in federal programs and services and all other programs or services receiving federal funds. Key language in the Rehabilitation Act, found in Section 504, states “No otherwise qualified handicapped individual in the United States, shall, solely by reason of his [sic] handicap, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.” This was the first civil rights law guaranteeing equal opportunity for people with disabilities.

Another crucial turning point was the nationwide sit-in in 1977 of government buildings operated by HEW (the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare), conceived by Frank Bowe and organized by the American Coalition of Citizens with Disabilities, that led to the release of regulations pursuant to Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. On April 5, 1977, activists began to demonstrate and some sat-in in the offices found in ten of the federal regions including New York City, Los Angeles, Boston, Denver, Chicago, Philadelphia, and Atlanta. The two most noteworthy protests occurred in San Francisco and Washington, D.C. The protesters demanded the signing of regulations for Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. There were about 300 people in Washington, D.C. who marched to and then demonstrated inside the HEW building where Secretary Joseph Califano’s office was. He was the person who was to sign the regulations, but was delaying the process. Although he met with a few protest representatives, including Frank Bowe, he still did not sign. This action led many protesters to continue their sit-in overnight, but they then left after 28 hours. The more successful sit-in occurred in San Francisco, led by Judith Heumann. The first day of protests marked the first of a 25-day sit-in. Close to 120 disability activists and protesters occupied the HEW building. Califano finally signed on April 28, 1977. This protest was significant not only because its goal was achieved, but also because it was the foremost concerted effort between people of different disabilities coming together in support of legislation that affected the overall disability population, rather than only specific groups. Prior to the 1990 enactment of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act was the most important disability rights legislation in the United States.

In 1978 disability rights activists in Denver, Colorado, organized by the Atlantis Community, held a sit-in and blockade of the Denver Regional Transit Authority buses in 1978. They were protesting the fact that city’s transit system was completely inaccessible for the physically disabled. This action proved to be just the first in a series of civil disobedience demonstrations that lasted for a year until the Denver Transit Authority finally bought buses equipped with wheelchair lifts. In 1983, Americans Disabled for Accessible Public Transit (ADAPT) was responsible for another civil disobedience campaign also in Denver that lasted seven years. They targeted the American Public Transport Association in protest of inaccessible public transportation; this campaign ended in 1990 when bus lifts for people using wheelchairs were required nationwide by the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Another significant protest related to disability rights was the Deaf President Now protest by the Gallaudet University students in Washington, D.C. in March 1988. The 8-day (March 6 – March 13) demonstration and occupation and lock-out of the school began when the Board of Trustees appointed a new hearing President, Elisabeth Zinser, over two Deaf candidates. The students’ primary grievance was that the university, which was dedicated to the education of the hearing-impaired, had never had a Deaf president, someone representative of them. Of the protesters’ four demands, the main one was the resignation of the current president and the appointment of a Deaf one. The student demonstration consisted of about 2,000 participants who were not just students. The protests not only took place on campus, but they also took it to government buildings and marched through the streets. In the end, all the students’ demands were met and I. King Jordan was appointed the first Deaf President of the university.

In 1990, the Americans with Disabilities Act became law, and it provided comprehensive civil rights protection for people with disabilities. Closely modeled after the Civil Rights Act and Section 504, the law was the most sweeping disability rights legislation in American history. It mandated that local, state, and federal governments and programs be accessible, that employers with more than 15 employees make “reasonable accommodations” for workers with disabilities and not discriminate against otherwise qualified workers with disabilities, and that public accommodations such as restaurants and stores not discriminate against people with disabilities and that they make “reasonable modifications” to ensure access for disabled members of the public. The act also mandated access in public transportation, communication, and in other areas of public life.

In the United Kingdom, following extensive activism by disabled people over several decades, the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA 1995) was passed. This made it unlawful in the United Kingdom to discriminate against people with disabilities in relation to employment, the provision of goods and services, education and transport. The Equality and Human Rights Commission provides support for this Act. Equivalent legislation exists in Northern Ireland, which is enforced by the Northern Ireland Equality Commission.

Abortion rates

A 2002 literature review of elective abortion rates found that 91–93% of pregnancies in the United Kingdom and Europe with a diagnosis of Down syndrome were terminated. Data from the National Down Syndrome Cytogenetic Register in the United Kingdom indicates that from 1989 to 2006 the proportion of women choosing to terminate a pregnancy following prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome has remained constant at around 92%.

In the United States a number of studies have examined the abortion rate of fetuses with Down syndrome. Three studies estimated the termination rates at 95%, 98%, and 87% respectively.

Ethical issues

Medical ethicist Ronald Green argues that parents have an obligation to avoid 'genetic harm' to their offspring, and Claire Rayner, then a patron of the Down's Syndrome Association, defended testing and abortion saying "The hard facts are that it is costly in terms of human effort, compassion, energy, and finite resources such as money, to care for individuals with handicaps... People who are not yet parents should ask themselves if they have the right to inflict such burdens on others, however willing they are themselves to take their share of the burden in the beginning."

Some physicians and ethicists are concerned about the ethical ramifications of the high abortion rate for this condition. Conservative commentator George Will called it "eugenics by abortion". British peer Lord Rix stated that "alas, the birth of a child with Down's syndrome is still considered by many to be an utter tragedy" and that the "ghost of the biologist Sir Francis Galton, who founded the eugenics movement in 1885, still stalks the corridors of many a teaching hospital". Doctor David Mortimer has argued in Ethics & Medicine that "Down's syndrome infants have long been disparaged by some doctors and government bean counters." Some members of the disability rights movement "believe that public support for prenatal diagnosis and abortion based on disability contravenes the movement's basic philosophy and goals." Peter Singer argued that "neither haemophilia nor Down's syndrome is so crippling as to make life not worth living from the inner perspective of the person with the condition. To abort a fetus with one of these disabilities, intending to have another child who will not be disabled, is to treat fetuses as interchangeable or replaceable. If the mother has previously decided to have a certain number of children, say two, then what she is doing, in effect, is rejecting one potential child in favour of another. She could, in defence of her actions, say: the loss of life of the aborted fetus is outweighed by the gain of a better life for the normal child who will be conceived only if the disabled one dies."

See also

• Ableism
• Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005
• American Coalition of Citizens with Disabilities
• Americans with Disabilities Act
• Architectural Barriers Act of 1968
• Big Apple Pothole and Sidewalk Protection Committee
• Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
• Declaration on the Rights of Disabled Persons
• Inclusion (disability rights)
• List of disability rights activists
• List of disability rights organizations
• Medical model of disability
• Person Centred Planning
• Section 504
• Social model of disability
• Visitability - Social Integration Beyond Independent Living

Lawsuits

• Access Now v. Southwest Airlines
• Mills vs. Board of Education of District of Columbia

External links

Listen to this article (info/dl)

Note: this file is approximately 18.3 megabytes

This audio file was created from a revision of the "Disability rights movement" article dated 2009-04-20, and does not reflect subsequent edits to the article. (Audio help)

More spoken articles

• Disability Rights and Rehabilitation by Einar Helander
• Independent Living Resources
• National Organization on Disability
• The Rolling Rains Report on Travel, Disability, and Universal Design A blog positioning inclusive consumer activities such as travel within the disability rights movement through the use of the movement's design philosophy Universal Design.
• Society for Disability Studies
• Lives Worth Living site for Independent Lens on PBS

Further reading

• Bagenstos, Samuel. Law and the Contradictions of the Disability Rights Movement (Yale University Press, 2009). ISBN 978-0300124491
• Barnartt, Sharon N. and Scotch, Richard. Disability Protests: Contentious Politics 1970-1999 (Gallaudet University Press, 2001) ISBN 978-1563681127
• Colker, Ruth and Milani, Adam. Everyday Law for Individuals with Disabilities (Paradigm Publishers, 2005). ISBN 978-1594511455
• Fleischer, Doris Zames and Zames, Frieda. The Disability Rights Movement: From Charity to Confrontation (Temple University Press, 2nd Edition, 2011). ISBN 1439907439

ISBN 978-1439907436

• Johnson, Mary and The Ragged Edge Online Community. Disability Awareness - do it right! Your all-in-one how-to guide (The Advocado Press, 2006). ISBN 978-0972118910
• Johnson, Roberta Ann. "Mobilizing the Disabled.," in Social Movements of the Sixties and Seventies, edited by Jo Freeman (Longman, 1983), pp. 82–100; reprinted in Waves of Protest: Social Movements Since the Sixties edited by Jo Freeman and Victoria Johnson (Rowman and Littlefield, 1999), pp. 25–45. Waves of Protest: Social Movements Since the Sixties has ISBN 978-0847687480
• Longmore, Paul, K. and Umansky, Laurie, editors, The New Disability History: American Perspectives (New York University Press, 2001). ISBN 978-0814785645
• O'Brien, Ruth. Crippled Justice: The History of Modern Disability Policy in the Workplace (University Of Chicago Press, 2001). ISBN 978-0226616599
• Pelka, Fred. The ABC Clio Companion to the Disability Rights Movement (ABC-Clio, 1997). ISBN 978-0874368345
• The Regents of the University of California. The Disability Rights and Independent Living Movement (Berkeley, CA: The University of California Berkeley, 2001). Web. Copyright © 2007 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Document maintained on server: http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/ by The Bancroft Library. www.bancroft.berkeley.edu/collections/drilm/aboutus/project.html
• Shapiro, Joseph P. No Pity: People with Disabilities Forging a New Civil Rights Movement (Times Books, 1993). ISBN 978-0812924121
• Stroman, Duane. The Disability Rights Movement: From Deinstitutionalization to Self-Determination (University Press of America, 2003). ISBN 978-0761824800