On Thursday many disability activists across the country will be celebrating the fact that the ‘Wow Petition’, a government e-petition, will have reached the necessary 100,000 signatures to be debated in parliament. They will regard this as an important message to the government from the British public that they will not tolerate the alleged cuts upon ‘disabled people’. I however feel saddened and frustrated at what I see is a petition that highlights the rise in politically accepted prejudices and pity towards disabled people as naturally inferior beings, rather than as citizens capable of making a meaningful contribution to society.

I have three main concerns to why I think this petition is a step backwards for disabled people and indeed the whole of society. The first is the absolute pointless nature of a cumulative impact assessment, which would be nothing more than a very costly and lengthy government funded ‘bitchfest’, enabling every charity, disability activist and general crackpot to line up to provide supposed evidence on how and why disabled people are suffering based on lies, myths and the general socialist assumptions that disabled people can not work.

If the assessment was done properly, it would show many disabled people are not affected by the cuts, but these are the ones who would never be heard. I am not sure what will be the benefit of such a costly exercise other than to provide the anti-cuts and perhaps anti-disabled activists the cement to turn their lies and myths into false facts, dooming disabled people to be regarded as nothing more than unemployable users of welfare by a movement that pities them.

My second concern is what exactly does the Wow Petition stand for? There is no official supporting evidence to the petition and I am not sure what exactly the MPs can debate in what is a garbled mix of unrelated and confusing demands where people can asked to fill in the gaps in the way they think best, making the meaning of the petition anything anyone wants it to be, as I have told again and again on twitter. Does it believe disabled people should be locked away in day centres or segregated in Remploy factories? What does it want happen to ATOS? Does it believe only people with learning difficulties, not all disabled people, should have an education? or is it offended people with learning difficulties get an education? Does it believe carers know best and should have control over their burdens?

There are so many questions and very little answers from its organisers, who I believe regard the petition simply to be an ideological symbol of support for any lie and myth the anti-cuts movement wish to peddle in their attack on the rights of disabled people as employable citizens. And this leads me to my final and gravest concern, which is that the fact the petition has raised its desired 100,000 signatures means it will be regarded as a public affirmation that the British public supports every lie and myths of Anti-cuts disability activists, that can be turned into publically accepted facts, like ATOS kills, every disabled person experiences hate crime, ILF users will be forced into residential care and of course I am a Tory who works for ATOS!

This petition will provide the anti-cuts movement a ‘mandate’ to continue its fierce attack on disabled people with pity and patronising assumptions on how they have no meaningful place in society and be simply swept under the carpet with label based compensation rather than enabled and empowered to be fully equal and included citizens. The petition will be an excuse to increase the negative portrayal of disabled people, turning the clock back 150 years, actually helping the Tories with their dream of a Victorian style society.

I am not worried about the actual parliamentary debate since the MPs will murmur the right noises with many backbenchers trying to score points by stating the well-rehearsed lies from the anti-cuts movement, and then the government will politely and professionally explain how the demand of a cumulative impact assessment is a load of rubbish and how it is never going to happen, whatever Government is in power.

I am however worried about the impact of petition will have on an already obsessed and paranoid anti-cuts movement, who see disabled people as footballs to kick around with little regard for the consequences in their desire to have the impossible dream of a socialist government. Thursday is therefore not going to be a day many ‘real’ disabled people will be celebrating as the wow is certainly taken out of disability.

from Simon Stevens http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/simon-stevens/taking-the-wow-out-of-dis_b_4411357.html

via IFTTT

I grew up both understanding and benefiting from the concept known as ‘independent living’ although as we roll further into the 21st Century, I wonder if the concept has lost its way and what is its future? Within an different era, where so many disabled people were segregated in various types of residential care settings, independent living was simply about living in the community with the necessary support required, which was a very big deal at that time.

But living in the community is only the very first step and the independent living movement realised it should also be about choice and control, which is a great ideology although it must be within a context of responsibilities and consequences, otherwise it becomes meaningless. And I feel where this is we are right now. While the independent living movement has focuses what the rights of disabled people and what they need or perhaps want to have a good quality of life, I feel they have so far ignored the responsibilities that go with being a good citizen.

The main problem in terms of independent living for the majority of disabled people is that it requires some level of financial and/or other contribution from the state. This means that while it may appear correct to focus on someone’s rights, if the state does not feel it is getting something from their investment they will find it hard to justify it, especially since we do live in a world of finite resources. It is therefore in the best interests of the independent living movement to reframe the concept to provide a greater focus on what disabled people living ‘independently’ can give back to the state.

I do not see this as necessary being about employment, paid or otherwise, but a willingness to make the effort to contribute to society, even if the result is very small. In this context, I see independent living as a continuous process of improved social inclusion, a type of social model version of rehabilitation. If we take for example the starting point of someone who experienced a spinal injury from a road traffic accident, we can see an ‘independent living pathway’ from the ambulance, to the acute hospital service, to the spinal rehab unit, to moving into an adapted home and employing PAs, to employment support and then eventually finding new paid employment. Another pathway could be for a disabled child and all the support activities they require to be a contributing member of society throughout their life.

For these pathways to work, the barriers between health, social care, housing, employment, education, transport and other services need to be broken down as we would need multi-disciplinary teams who can duly assess and support people as and when they need it, possibly with a mixture of personalised support payments, to fund care, support and other costs, and specific services as required. This would be the biggest shift in the way welfare, health services and social care would be delivered since the start of the welfare state. The system must be very responsive, and so delivered locally, possibly through local government, but also be fair and just with national standards and guidelines.

More importantly the focus will move away from label based eligibility to a flexible system of meeting people’s outcomes, in line with their responsibilities as citizens, taking into account their health, care, social, and as importantly emotional needs. While health and care, that can be deemed as basic, may be met as a basic right regardless of circumstances, social and emotional needs will be dependent on the amount of effort someone is willing to put in to be a good citizens such as employment, education, raising a family, involvement in political activities, or simply being compliant with a treatment plan even if that means just resting.

I feel this new way of independent living can only work if there is a theoretical believe from professionals and society that all disabled people have human potential and should have the ultimate goal of paid employment or raising a family if they wish to be considered a good citizen, in the same way every non-disabled person is regarded, even if the reality of their potential, within the current state of technology and the environment, is very different.

Independent living has succeeded to get many disabled people a quality of life equal to their peers, but I believe it is time for the next step if we are truly committed as a society to the liberation of disabled people, particularly those with high support needs, as equal citizens with the same rights and responsibilities as anyone else.

from Simon Stevens http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/simon-stevens/independent-living_b_4376542.html

via IFTTT