It is important to recognize and honor diversity as it brings a lot of interesting stuff to the table. But diversity should not be used as a comparison to some contrived norm made up by those with power and privilege.
When we think about attributes of any race we, as a society, have been taught to compare any race to white or Caucasian. We use white attributes as the norm. While there are currently more white people in the US than any other individual race, that does not automatically make it the "standard" by which to compare all other races nor does it make it the most desirable. The same can be said for any other demographic category that is in the majority like non-disabled people.
Our society sets standards according to the normed, majority group and expects all others to fit in. We have seen throughout our history. This is the idea of assimilation, the process whereby individuals or groups of differing ethnic heritage are absorbed into the dominant culture of a society....the process in which a minority group or culture comes to resemble a society's majority group or assimilate the values, behaviors, and beliefs of another group whether fully or partially. This is the "Great Melting Pot" idea. But, as said by Marcus Garvey when referencing the black separatist movement, to “assimilate” meant to conform to white expectations of behavior at the price of sacrificing black identities and cultural values. Additionally assimilation is sort of nonsensical in that it, no matter how well a person can assimilate values, behaviors and beliefs, at the end of the day we can still see that that person is black.
I think we are all keenly aware of this situation for black Americans. We may not all feel the same way about it but we are aware of it. We may not though be as aware of this same situation for people with disabilities. While some concessions have been made to make society accessible to more, it is certainly not accessible to all. I am not only talking about physical accessibility like curb cuts, ramps, wider doorways and elevators. I am also talking about attitudinal, emotional and social accessibility. I have encountered many people who have family members with signifiant physical needs. They use wheelchairs and AAC, they need to have someone feed them or they have a GI tube for nutrition, their bodies are not straight and well aligned. Basically they look different and act different and need different things than their non-disabled peers who happen to be in the majority in pretty much any environment. Some of these families do not want to take their son, sister, nephew, spouse out to restaurants or movie theaters because they think they will be disruptive or make others uncomfortable. Some wont do it because they feel uncomfortable because they are different and are often stared at, others because they do not like the patronizing approach many take with people with disabilities. This is all sort of reminiscent of assimilation.
Society likes familiarity and sameness and conformity. Even if we can see that you are not "the norm", at least act like it. But that only works for that majority, that privileged group with the power--for this conversation that would be non-disabled people. For years people with disabilities have been isolated an segregated and separated from the "norm". Once they were allowed to go to school (another topic for another time!) they were sent to separate schools, special schools, schools where they will be around people like them. Sound familiar? Even now when kids with disabilities, by law, attend the public school they would attend if they were not disabled, they are often segregated into separate classes with other kids with disabilities. So really is it any wonder that society does not know how to act around with people with disabilities? Most non-disabled people have never had any interaction with people with disabilities. As youth, they were never in a situation where they could potentially befriend a person with a disability. Our attitudes begin forming while we are very young. If we are only exposed to certain people, cultures, characteristics, attitudes, beliefs etc we can never form opinions or attitudes or even feelings anything "different".
We have made this realization about race and religion and ethnicity (though we still have a long long way to go) but we have yet to make it about disability. Schools are full of people of various races, religions and ethnicities all intermingling and having the opportunity to learn with and about each other and form friendships and other lasting bonds. I think part of the reason for this is that for race and religion and ethnicity we have decided that, in general, they are all equal. Now I know this can be argued. Personally I know that no one race, religion or ethnicity is better than another but there are those among us who do not think this way. But as a society as a whole we have made a concerted effort to put constructs into place to limit discrimination based on these things. Federal laws prohibit discrimination based on a person's national origin, race, color, religion, disability, sex, and familial status. Laws prohibiting national origin discrimination make it illegal to discriminate because of a person's birthplace, ancestry, culture or language. Notice that disability is included in there. So why do we still discriminate? I think it is mainly due to ignorance and lack of exposure.
In school, we tend to segregate kids with disabilities. Not only does this send a message to the kids with disabilities and their families, it also sends a message to everyone else. I have heard so many justifications for why kids with disabilities are segregated in school--they have such unique needs that they can only be handled in a separate place. They are more confident and comfortable with kids like them. It is safer to keep them separated from the general population. All of these are basically a bunch of hooey. These are all rationalizations made by non-disabled folks for not having to change the status quo of the environment to make is more accessible to ALL learners. Let's take a look at each of these justifications for the need for a separate place.
- These students have such unique needs that they need to be handled in a separate place--Why? There are few needs that are so unique that they need to handled elsewhere and most of them would not be delivered while a child is in school anyway. Most of the time this argument is more about the "disruption" to the other children's learning, the cost of having to change the environment to meet that one child's needs, or the contrived feelings of happiness of the child with a disability being educated with other kids like them--it will make them feel different if they receive said service in the general education setting. All of these "reasons" are excuses. The "disruption" argument only holds water because most children are simply not used to having peers with significant disabilities with them in the classroom. Having a child enjoy lunch via a GI tube, use a stander or other flexible positioning while in math class, use AAC to engage in the class debate, have a trach or a ventilator to be able to join in any activities are only disruptive if you've never seen them before. So by isolating children with these needs their peers never see them and therefore they becomes disruptive when they do, but if kids receive service to meet their unique needs with their peers as the norm, then it is just that--the norm. And that attitude will carry with them forever. It is no longer disruptive, it is just different and part of who that child is. As for cost, it may cost a school a bit of money to provide a specific service but that is simply no good reason not to do it. And likely but being flexible about how and where and by whom services are delivered, the cost will even itself out. The argument of children with disabilities being more comfortable with other children with similar needs so they do not feel different is an extension of the disruption argument. Children with complex needs will default to being more comfortable with peers with disabilities mainly because their peers without disabilities are not comfortable with them, because they never see them or engage with them so kids with disabilities essentially need to default to finding a comfortable peer group among the children they see daily--other children with similar needs. It is a vicious circle.
- They are more confident and comfortable with kids like them--again is this related to the above arguments about comfort and happiness. If children with disabilities are alway kept away from peers without disabilities this will become a self fulfilling prophecy for all involved. We need to remember that school is supposed to be preparing children for the rest of their lives and IDEA even says that upfront: "Disability is a natural part of the human experience and in no way diminishes the right of individuals to participate in or contribute to society. Improving educational results for children with disabilities is an essential element of our national policy of ensuring equality of opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency for individuals with disabilities...[and] to ensure that all children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate public education that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs and prepare them for further education, employment, and independent living" (IDEA 2004).
- It is safer to keep them separated from the general population. Safer for whom? Once children leave school they will not be protected by being segregated. There is no Autism Movie Theater or Down's Syndrome Restaurant. By keeping children with disabilities isolated from the broader school environment we are actually hindering their safety. All people need to learn to interact and live side by side with all sorts of other people. We need to understand, respect, learn from and teach each other. When people with or without disabilities do not know how to interact with one another or to understand one another, that is when safety can become an issue. The biggest place I see this is in social interactions. When the actions of a person with a disability are misinterpreted (or actually interpreted through a lens of what society considers the norm) this can lead to very devastating results. For example, if a person using a wheelchair accidentally bumps someone because the physical environment is not conducive to wheelchair use and causes harm to the person, we do not blame the environment, we blame the wheelchair user. If a person with significant sensory needs resists being grabbed by pulling away and vocalizing loudly, this is often seen as aggressive. This has been seen as aggressive by the police even after they are informed that the person they are engaging has autism and will continue to escalate if they are restrained further. These types of safety issues can be diminished if individuals with disabilities are seen as people first starting from the beginning.