'It’s a convenient fiction to see disability as a discrete area, and
disabilities themselves as fixed and definable'. Photograph: John
James/Alamy
Last year, I wrote about my impressions of the National Disability
Insurance Scheme, along with other readers. I tried to point out that
improving the life of disabled people is about a lot more than
improving how they’re cared for and treated.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/05/the-coalitions-society-is-no-place-for-disabled-people
I’ve thought about that a bit since. Not long ago, I went to the
doctor to discuss a battery of tests I’ve had in recent months: an
ultrasound of my kidneys; a blood test; some x‐rays of my back and
pelvis; a bone density scan; a gait analysis.

Our discussion wasn’t as chipper as I’d hoped. I’m 31 now, and walking
around on crutches for a quarter century with a less-than-reliable
nervous system has inflicted the kind of wear you’d expect. For the
first time I’m getting new health problems that aren’t passing
anomalies —they’re sticking around, and the focus of doctors is
noticeably shifting from fixing to "slowing", "managing",
"offsetting".

And what happens from here on isn’t totally clear. Lots of people born
with spina bifida in generations before mine didn’t survive to be
adults, and it’s a condition that affects different people in
different ways. The data is neither voluminous nor very instructive.

Of course, these problems have just the same timeless ingredients as
everyone else’s: change, loss, a discomfiting awareness of ageing and
mortality, uncertainty about the future. Having a disability, like any
comparable nuisance, acts as a sort of prism for this omnipresent
angst‐stuff – just letting you feel it more keenly, and a little
earlier, than you might have otherwise.

That needn’t be a terrible thing. A slight narrowing of your available
options can prompt a sharper focus on what it is you value and want.
And a non‐lethal reminder that you’re getting older is just the ticket
if you want to get moving on those new year’s resolutions. Note that
I’m someone whose disability is moderate and predictable. I’m able to
perceive, communicate and get around in ordinary or close‐to‐ordinary
ways. If I were dealing with something acute or aggressively
degenerative, of course it’d be tougher.

But I’m not sure exactly how much tougher I would find it. There’s no
linear equation for weighing symptoms or prognoses against a capacity
to cope: to rationalise and respond to your situation in a measured,
productive way. How you manage that depends on a whole range of
factors about you and that situation: what occupies your time, what
you worry about and want, how much money you have, what your school
was like, where you live, how well you eat, who depends on you, who
your friends and family are – and, of course, who’s in government.

This diffuse matrix plays the same role with respect to disability as
it does with so much of our lives. In the same way disability puts a
sharp edge on the gritty stuff we all deal with, it magnifies the
disadvantage some of us suffer more than others. Even a disability
like mine requires decent coping skills and reliable social support,
and profoundly curtails my eligibility for low‐skilled or manual jobs.

What this means is there’s a lot less margin for error. If you’re far
enough ahead of the game, a handicap’s okay. But if you’re not – if
you’ve left school with poor literacy skills, grown up with familial
conflict, or struggle with the cost of living – then those things
could be the difference between living well with a disability, and
that disability stopping you, maybe forever, from being who you are or
should have been.

And here’s the upshot. In the business of formulating policy, it’s a
convenient fiction to see disability as a discrete area, and
disabilities themselves as fixed and definable. If we want that policy
to work, we need to keep an eye on the truth: that a person’s
disability comes down to much wider facts about them and their
circumstances.

Ultimately, dealing with disability means dealing with that wider
reality. It means reducing the cost of tertiary education and
training, both for those with disabilities and those who would become
their teachers, carers, nurses and doctors. It means addressing
intergenerational and geographical disadvantage; strengthening support
for new parents; and improving access not just to disability
treatment, but to affordable housing and legal services. In short, it
means committing not just to the NDIS but to a fairer country, and a
set of policies which complement each other in serving that vision.

The anaemic, rudderless performance of Abbott’s government suggests it
neither promises nor aspires to that kind of leadership. And when set
against the government’s general receptiveness to the Commission of
Audit’s recommendations – and its uncritical acceptance of the
Commission’s rationale – there is little comfort in COAG’s assurance
on Friday that it will press on with the NDIS rollout despite the
Commission’s proposals to the contrary.

Whether the Coalition follows through with the NDIS or not, it has
already shown its contempt for the kind of society where the scheme
could truly take root.


-- 
Avinash Shahi
M.Phil Research Scholar
Centre for The Study of Law and Governance
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi India



Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of 
mobile phones / Tabs on:
http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in


Search for old postings at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

To unsubscribe send a message to
[email protected]
with the subject unsubscribe.

To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please 
visit the list home page at
http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in


Disclaimer:
1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the 
person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity;

2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails sent 
through this mailing list..

Reply via email to