On July 26, our nation celebrated the 25th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The ADA is a civil-rights law, and it helps protect access to employment, education and public and community services for people with disabilities.
In its 25-year lifespan, the ADA has greatly increased community inclusion for people with disabilities. But we still have a long way to go. Statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicate that people with disabilities are still significantly more likely than people without disabilities to experience unemployment, violent crime, obesity, cardiovascular disease, lack of medical care and social isolation.
The barriers still experienced by people with disabilities are numerous and include everything from physical barriers (steps, curbs, shelves placed where people in wheelchairs can’t reach) to communication barriers (lack of braille or sign language interpretation, complicated or technical language) and attitudinal barriers (discrimination, stigmatizing and stereotyping).
While we’ve made progress, I must say I’m disappointed. I’m disappointed that 25 years later, we are still talking about inclusion as the ideal, the goal we hope to reach.
Think about what inclusion means. When you “include” something, you make it a part of a whole or a group.
But according to Dictionary.com, the verb include takes an object. In other words, it is something done unto something else. I (subject) include you (object). The thing or person being included is the object of inclusion.
Therein lies the problem.
Inclusion objectifies people with disabilities. The entire process of inclusion allows the same group (presumably those without disabilities) to retain the power to include or not include. The balance of power is still against those with disabilities. No wonder people with disabilities still find it harder to find jobs, housing, health care and social networks, if the employers/landlords/health providers/community members have the full power to grant inclusion or withhold it.
Twenty-five years into the ADA, we could be focusing on integration rather than inclusion. Integration combines separate entities into one unified whole. (Yes, grammatically, integrate also takes an object, which somewhat weakens my argument, but bear with me.)
When people with disabilities are part of the “we,” there is no need for inclusion. They are the subject of the sentence. That child with Down syndrome doesn’t have to wait for the kids on the playground to invite her into their game if she is already part of the group from the start.
The move from inclusion to integration will take a shift in power and a shift in the way we think about disabilities.
As long as people with disabilities remain the “them” that have to be helped, accommodated, supported or included, the power will stay where it is, and the barriers will remain. But when everyone becomes the “we” – that unified whole that works seamlessly together to make the important decisions about our communities – everyone (including people with disabilities) wins.
No more ramps across the barriers. It’s time to tear the barriers down.
Tara Kiene is the director of case management with Community Connections Inc.
