h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: Disability A20428472 - A55752294
Author: Teasswill - U185992

Done some more work on this one after picking it up in the Flea market & a brief airing in PR.

Hi Teasswill

I noticed you picked this out of the Fleamarket a while ago, and I am interested to see what you have done with it.

I had a quick look at the other Peer Review thread and I notice Mina prefers People with disabilities, but you should perhaps make note that other people (myself included) prefer Disabled People because we are people but 'society' disables us.

Do you want to include the definition of "disabled person" that will be used in the Equalities Act (or the Disability Discrimination Act definition) as well as the World Health Organisation one?

Also it is Paralympic Games, not para-olympics

I really like the way you have addressed various influences on societies' definitions of disability and what is 'normal' and it is good that you have emphasised that people are individuals.

As Mina says, it is a very big subject, and not easy to tackle, given the diversity of ways of looking at it. I look forward to seeing how this Entry progresses.

Just skim-reading this and wanted to pick you up on one sentence:

"There are also issues concerning the refusal of treatment and choice of euthanasia."

These are two very different matters - anyone with competency (or an advance directive stating their wishes or an LPA with power to make such decisions etc) can refuse treatment - see Re B (Adult, refusal of medical treatment) [2002].

On the other hand, euthanasia is not legal in the UK, there are guidelines as to whether individuals will be prosecuted for aiding persons travelling to Switzerland to end their lives, and the whole matter remains contentious. Thus I'd rather you didn't group the two things together in a slightly throw-away sentence.

Otherwise, this looks promising

Alex

Hi Teaswill

glad to see this back here once again!


It is definitely coming together well, and bearing in mind the two points made above can I just add a few nitpicks?



In an academic environment the mathematical autistic person may function successfully, but struggle in general society.
---->
In an academic environment the mathematical gifted, autistic person may function successfully, but struggle in general society.


In his last speech [on] November 1st 1977 U.S. Senator Hubert Humphrey remarked:

add [on] where indicated

the quotation needs to be placed between italic tags ie and



Someone whose appearance is unusual is more likely to be stared...

I think you need to emphasise that one's appearance would have to be extremely unusual for this to happen, maybe saying something along the lines of...

--->
Someone whose appearance is extremely unusual, or disfigured, is more likely to be stared


Sometimes the very desire for perfection becomes a flaw itself.

I'm not entirely sure I follow this part of your paragraph, do you mean that society becomes harsher towards those that do not fall into the attractive to look at category? (which it is in my opinion)


disability is perceived- in some cases

add a space after the word percieved


The needs of [the] society and how the people

remove the superfluous 'the'

useless if they cannot achieve the same as the majority.

---->

useless if they cannot achieve the same results as the majority.



This includes physically, socially and the financial means.

---->
This includes physically, socially and financially.


Legalities and consultation with user groups and disability experts has gone some way to improving the situation eg integration in mainstream teaching, wheelchair access to buildings, easily visible signage.

---->

Both the legal framework and consultation with user groups and disability experts have improved the situation in areas such as integration into mainstream education, wheelchair access to buildings, and easily visible signage.



non affected embryo. ----> non-affected embryo.

Thanks for all the input - entry now updated.

Lanzababy

Thanks for making changes, Teasswill. I've read it again, and still have a few comments.

Good to see the footnote about the DDA, but I'm still not quite sure about the definitions section. You explain the WHO definition in social model terms very well, but it perhaps needs stating that there are other possible definitions - sports might have complex classification systems, but in terms of defining disabled people as a community, the general idea tends to be to make it as simple and widely-encompassing as possible, and there are various ways of looking at it (some better than others).

My suggestion would be to replace 'Complex classifications' with 'Other definitions'.

I'm not keen on the section entitled 'Effects of society on disability', I'm afraid - there is a lot of debate around the word 'vulnerable' as a generalisation, and the quote is very old-fashioned (the dreaded h word leaped out at me ). I much prefer your sentences on rainforests in the Disability section and "The social context..." in the Impairment section as examples of how society causes disability.

I now see the logic of using the terminology 'people with disability', given that the title of the entry is 'disability'. You have made it clear to me in your descriptions that you include 'disabled people' as I understand the term. Some people would take issue with you on that, but I think it's better than using the term 'disabled people' and then ignoring how society disables people, which the powers that be can have a tendency to do...

Overall, you have made some excellent points in a concise way

Many thanks for your comments. That particular section was suggested last time in PR & I agree it does need revision. I hope to look at it all again over the weekend.

This is an entry with a lot of potential. You may want to add a bit more on the concept of euthanasia, which is extremely controversal. One of the most active voices agains the idea in the United States is a group called "Not Dead Yet."

http://notdeadyetnewscommentary.blogspot.com/

"Not Dead Yet was founded on April 27,1996, shortly after Jack Kevorkian was acquitted in the assisted suicides of two women with non-terminal disabilities. In a 1997 Supreme Court rally, the outcry of 500 people with disabilities chanting "Not Dead Yet" was heard around the world."

NBY

Done a further update.

I am anxious not to get too bogged down in detail, but indicate the various issues and different points of view concerning this subject.

I can see improvement, and agree that getting bogged down in detail isn't the way to go with this.

I'm not sure this sentence is grammatical....

This includes physically, socially and financially.


How about

This [includes/ will include] physical, social and financial opportunities.

I've just had a re-read of the entry. It strikes me as being about the right length and well balanced.

Looks good!!!

NBY

nudges Teasswill to edit and post

Sorry, I should have replied earlier. I'm not convinced abut the need to make that change - I was leaving it up to a sub-edit (if it gets to that stage) to decide.

I see the 1977 quote is still in the Effects of Society on Disability section...

I like the first paragraph in the section, though, and I also like the mention of independent (needing help from someone else to do certain things does not necessarily mean not being independent, just as non-disabled people may rely on other people to do certain things for them, like fly a plane or cut their hair) - self-determination and choice enables independence.

"Help" may not always be helpful, either - it is important to ask if someone wants help, and if they say no then that should be respected.

"There can be issues around medical treatment - the the right" - I spotted the extra 'the'

I've tweaked it a bit more - any better?
If you can suggest a better, more modern quote to use, that's fine. It certainly raises the issue of what terminology is used.

I really like the paragraph on 'help' although I have a feeling I preferred the way you mentioned independent before (but I can't remember exactly what you wrote...).

As it stands now, it *could* be interpreted that help is the opposite of independence, which is not true as I said yesterday. I hope you can change that bit back to how it was, but if you can't, or if I'm remembering it wrong, perhaps remove the first two sentences and add a mention of independence at the end of the paragraph instead (the last sentence of the paragraph is good, indicating what independence means in this context).

I like the way you mentioned different terminology, so I think the quote is fine now, but I'm still not sure about the use of 'vulnerable' - disabled does not automatically mean vulnerable and non-disabled people can be vulnerable too (it depends on the situation) - as I said before, there is a lot of debate around that term, especially when used as a generalisation. I think I'm objecting to the Aristotle quote in this context now! I did a quick search, and "least advantaged" is a phrase that came up, but I don't know whether that is any better (a bit cumbersome)...

Apart from those two points, I think it is looking very good

I hadn't changed the bit about independence, but added to it. I've now separated it from the new bit. And tweaked a bit more!

Thanks Teasswill - I like the extra sentence about all people, disabled or not.

I also find I prefer the bit about independence in the same paragraph as the new bit, like you had it before.

With that one change, I'll be happy with it now. Good work!