The bulk of the post involved Dan Habib, the father and filmmaker responsible for Including Samuel, which tells the story of his family's fight for inclusion for his son Samuel, who has cerebral palsy. The BusinessWeek post asks Habib about public acceptance of inclusion, and the citizens who are quoted sound identical to many whom I've heard from on the subject, including in the comments to my own blog. Habib's answer is brilliant.
But in this economy, just how much enthusiasm is Dan getting for inclusion? Not everyone is a fan—not by a long shot, judging by some of the comments on my blog last May. "Why do we even bother paying for education for these kids?," wrote a commenter named Lilly. "Their parents chose to have kids and now their disability and special needs amount to a rise in taxes. Their parents just get a lawyer and fight and fight until the school district ends up paying for special programs. Why? Why not divert the funds for gifted and talented students instead of kids who will need societal support their whole life."
Lilly's anger about how taxpayers' money is spent is not so uncommon. How many of us have heard the same complaint in our own school districts? And how many Lillys does Dan run into on his?
I pitched that question to him by e-mail, and he replied with a list of "myths and realities" about inclusion. One myth, he says, is the notion that taxpayers are throwing away money by educating kids with disabilities. His response: "How can Lilly or anyone else predict which child will contribute to our society? Would Lilly really argue that Bernie Madoff … added more to the world than the physicist Stephen Hawking (who wrote his greatest work after he was severely disabled by ALS)? How about Albert Einstein (widely thought to have had Asperger Syndrome), Helen Keller (blind, deaf, and unable to speak) and Vincent Van Gogh (mentally ill)? People are not limited by their disability, they are limited by a lack of opportunity."
"People are not limited by their disability, they are limited by a lack of opportunity."
I could try for a year to find the words to describe my own philosophy of inclusion, and I couldn't do better than that.
Well, Lilly's just full of fucking compassion, isn't she.
ReplyDeleteMy friend Georgia Griffith was born blind and went deaf later in life. She became a computer whiz (called herself G-Wiz) and helped other handicapped people learn to use the computer. Watching her crawling around her office, attaching and unattaching cords to her computers one would be hard pressed to doubt her ability to make contributions to society. Before her death, she was honored by the Smithsonian for her contributions to learning for the handicapped.
ReplyDeleteI always have to remember to use the term "handicapped" because she was adamant that she didn't have a disability, she had a handicap, and she never let that stop her from doing anything.
(She once worked for the Library of Congress and translated all 9 Beethoven symphonies into Braille because she felt that blind people needed to have the opportunity to play Beethoven.)
Conuly.....couldn't possibly have said that better myself.....khayman1
ReplyDeleteThing is, they don't take up hours and hours of teacher's time. It's the snot noses brats that these parents have, the one's who've never been told no, the one's that have never been disciplined.
ReplyDeleteThen they say "well the class would get the EA/TA". Sweetheart, if my kid wasn't in that class... there wouldn't be one.
Plus, those of us with children with disabilities - and give a damn, b/c from what the school's implied we're NOT the norm - tend to do it ourselves.
I think they just hate the fact that our children are learning, and learning better and faster than their's with what little help they do get.
Inclusion's important because sooner or later you have to live with everyone. My son's classmates have OFFERED to take turns playing with him in the little kids side in the fenced in area - runner. Let's see, compasion, understanding, kindness, taking turns, learning to teach and therefore learning.... Social skills.
Love the saying.
I really wanted to vomit when I read Lilly's quote and got to the term "these" kids. I mean, is it always going to be these and the rest of them? It's exhausting. I feel like telling people, Lilly in particular, I am one of those gifted and talented kids. I had the wherewithal to figure out how to bridge the gaps that might have been missing in my education (they weren't). So I would much, much, much rather my taxpayer dollars go back into educating my moderately and severely disabled students, THESE kids, because they're the ones who need it.
ReplyDeleteI don't know where I heard this quote first, but to me it's the pillar of special education: fair doesn't mean everyone gets the same thing. Fair means everyone gets what they need.
I think it's easy for people to see others, especially other people's children, as the ones needing help and consuming tax dollars. But here's the thing, none</b of us know when this might happen to our kids. Why discriminate or complain about others when it could be our own kids next?
ReplyDeleteWhat purpose does it serve anyway, aren't we all better when we can see the humanity in everyone, rather than just in those who fit our internal definition of 'normal'?
I was a completely healthy and capable kid until I was diagnosed with diabetes at 15. In those days it was considered more of a burden than now. Should I have been excluded from things because it cost too much to include me? I'm just glad that people with Lilly's demeanor weren't in charge.
"People are not limited by their disability, they are limited by a lack of opportunity."
ReplyDeleteBingo.
That statement deserves a standing ovation. And people like Lilly deserve a child with a SEVERE lifelong disability. Except, I'd pity the child, having her for a mother.
ReplyDeleteI think inclusion is great because it helps teach our children that these kids are just kids too. Sure they may look, act, communicate differently, but they're still just kids who can learn and interact and contribute to a group.
ReplyDeleteI've seen somewhat-out-of-control young teenagers really step up and become young adults just by being part of a group with a severely mentally and physically handicapped young man. I don't know why these two young people really changed their attitudes but I do know it happened while they were interacting with Mike.
This wasn't in a traditional educational environment, but I know that my kids won't be harmed by having inclusion in their classrooms. More likely that they'll learn some things they wouldn't have without it.
Lilly presupposes that it's a disadvantage to the other students to have a relationship with a disabled classmate. I've found that it's generally an advantage. In addition to learning what farmwifetwo mentioned, "compasion, understanding, kindness, taking turns, learning to teach and therefore learning.... Social skills," I also feel that there's a deeper lesson. They learn that all people are worthy of love and respect. They learn tolerance and understanding of differences. That understanding can allow them to see not just past disability but past race, gender, religion, and socio-economics. They learn that we are all just people.
ReplyDeleteAnd by the way, I just read a great article about intelligence that had this to say, "The American Psychological Association convened a task force, which concluded that children’s IQ scores could predict about 25 per cent of the variation in future academic performance. They were, in other words, on the cusp of being statistically reliable, better than nothing." That's just an indicator of academic success. Who knows how it holds up as an indicator of things like economic success or contributions to society?
The full article is at http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/4add9230-23d5-11de-996a-00144feabdc0.html if you're interested.
Bev, I completely agree about the term "handicapped" being preferable to "disabled". If something is "disabled" it means it's turned off, rendered inoperable that sort of thing. A handicap, on the other hand, is just a challenge to overcome, like on the racetrack. And like Harrison Bergeron, it's possible for people to excel in spite of them, whether they are internally generated or imposed from outside.
ReplyDeleteAmen to that:
ReplyDelete"People are not limited by their disability, they are limited by a lack of opportunity."
Helen Keller herself became "radicalized" (that is, labeled as a radical by those she threatened) when she realized that blind children and adults needed money and opportunities to learn, and started talking openly about how she had become what she was because her parents were wealthy enough to afford Annie Sullivan, a trained full-time tutor. The uproar that this attitude caused is absolutely amazing. Biographies of Keller still tend to either end with her renewed understanding of language (when she was about eight) or censor her later involvement with the politics of disability.
ReplyDeleteNo one "choses" to have a child with a disability. Lilly makes me sick to my stomach.
ReplyDeleteWe are currently in a fight in my school district to prevent them from cutting or eliminating ESY for our kids. This is their bright idea to save money. And it irks me to no end because our property taxes are the higest in the nation and most goes to the school system.
ReplyDeleteTo someone who doesn't have a child with disabilities, it must seem logical to cut ESY and save that money for their kids.
To me, it seems like the marching band could forego new uniforms so that my kid has some shot of being able to communicate with the world.
I am not defending them, but I think people like Lilly just don't get it. I thought that I was an empathetic person, but I didn't really get it until I was part of it.
We need to keep educating people so that the see that having the opportunity is important no matter who you are, what you look like, or where you come from.
R.
This isn't really relevant, but anyone involved in a school music program could tell you that any money not spent educating your child would NOT go towards band uniforms. It would go towards sponsoring a bunch of sweaty guys to run around on fake grass hitting each other and fighting over a leather ball. Music is an essential part of education because almost everyone can contribute in some way. Sports are all about exclusion. Anyway, that's not relevant at all. Carry on.
ReplyDeleteWay back when, when I was in college, gifted education was part of special education. I kind of liked that idea.
ReplyDeleteDude, Lilly...I hope you weren't misquoted or whatever - that it wasn't a rhetorical question or something...but that sure sounds PURE EVIL.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, I think gifted should also be part of Special Ed.
On an unrelated note -- I just read this in an article on the increase in the gap between the poorest and richest in the U.S.:
ReplyDeletePlano, Texas, a Dallas suburb, had the highest median income among larger cities, earning $85,003.
A mantra sorely needed in these difficult, difficult times. I'm wondering where you get the energy to keep up the good fight. I just want to lie down and surrender, sometimes. Thank you for keeping at it, though. I'm grateful.
ReplyDeleteA tangent:
ReplyDelete"'Why do we even bother paying for education for these kids?,' wrote a commenter named Lilly. 'Their parents chose to have kids and now their disability and special needs amount to a rise in taxes.'"
I wonder if Lilly also has a bumper sticker proclaiming "It's a child, not a choice" on her car...
And what about those kids (and adults) who are disabled AND gifted and talented? Bah.
ReplyDeleteAnd you can have a perfectly developing child and bam...something happens and they need services. Things like freak traumatic brain injuries, encephalitis, etc.
ReplyDeletethinking of Lilly's comment, it made me wonder if she would be happier if everybody's child got the same education, and then when they were adults, if they did not contribute satisfactorily to society, the parents were then liable to repay the gov't (on behalf of the taxpayers) for their "wasted" education. i know a number of fully functioning, apparently intellectually and mentally sound children who are rude, lazy, obnoxious and contribute nothing....and yet, according to ppl like Lilly, we should be paying for THEIR education? makes me wonder what Lilly has contributed to society lately.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry, but Lilly's response made me want to beat her face into the wall. If these people had a freaking ounce of a clue of what parents go through for their children...and what the kids themselves go through and how hard they work just to catch up to The Normals...maybe they'd just stfu and let us be.
ReplyDelete