Disability is not a subject for show and tell

    I can remember when I was teaching, “cultural diversity and sensitivity education” was popular for both the students and the staff. We had guest speakers, discussion groups, folks who volunteered to share stories about their heritage, and book studies from a diverse set of authors with a diverse set of topics. But one aspect of cultural diversity that was never included was disability. I brought this up to our leadership and they agreed that it should be included. I was pleased until the lessons regarding disability were presented. A common approach to disability education is the use of simulation activities. Presumably, the idea behind this practice is that allowing individuals without disabilities to “try on” various disabilities, will help them develop empathy for people with disabilities, but the practice of using simulations to learn about disability is flawed and harmful.

    Some of the common “lessons” using simulation include people without disabilities wearing a blindfold, using a wheelchair, or wearing noise-canceling headphones in an attempt to feel what it is like to have a disability.  Engaging in these types of simulation activities creates a flawed and very limited perception of disability. If a person engages in an activity wearing a blindfold, supposedly to simulate blindness, they might think the activity is sort of fun or silly, leaving them with the perception that it’s fun to be blind. The opposite could also occur where they may leave the activity thinking, “Thank goodness I’m not blind.” This perpetuates the narrative that disability is tragic. Probably they will also walk away from such an activity believing that people with disabilities need help and pity to make their lives easier or better. 

    Additionally, in these simulations, when folks use a communication device or a wheelchair for a short period and then have the option to yell or run on the playground, it does not help students understand how to be supportive of people with speech-related or physical disabilities, nor does it help students understand how people who use assistive tools and supports feel about their disability. Even being as close as I am to my brother, Dave, I have no idea how he truly feels about having a disability.  He can tell me, but I cannot KNOW, much like I can never KNOW how my son feels about being a black male.  We can discuss it and I can understand academically, but I cannot feel what he feels. Simulations are intended to help with empathy and understanding.  I think they can be patronizing and further marginalizing for individuals with disabilities. As a side note, when we did this exercise at the school where I taught, my students, all of whom had various disabilities themselves, were expected to participate in an effort to be inclusive.  This was the epitome of that good old road to hell that is paved with good intentions.  I will leave it up to you to imagine how that turned out. 

  Another practice that is commonly employed in disability education is using individuals with disabilities like show-and-tell, asking them to share with their classmates, colleagues, church fellows, or teammates about their disability as a means to help people without disabilities to feel more comfortable and be more understanding of the one with a disability. When my son was in second grade, he came home excited to tell me about the girl in his class whose show-and-tell that day was the best ever.  In his words, her show-and-tell was a “fake leg.” I was at first horrified, then perplexed, then angry, as the story progressed. Apparently, a new student had started in his class earlier that week who happened to have a prosthetic leg. Her mother came to their class and told her daughter to remove and then reattach her prosthesis for the class. While this was going on, her mom informed the class that her daughter had been in a car accident as a baby that killed her parents and caused her to lose her leg.  Her Mom and Dad then adopted her. I have to believe her actions were with the best of intentions and meant to educate the class and remove any stigma from her daughter, but my son certainly missed that point completely. He thought it was amazing that she could take off her leg, but he did not identify her as a child with a disability.  She was just a classmate. He had already befriended this young lady before the class presentation and thought nothing of her prosthesis. Having been around his Uncle Dave for his entire life and being a black child with Chinese stepsisters and a white mom, my son was accustomed to diversity. The show-and-tell lesson was fun for him, but it may have backfired for others. They may not have paid her prosthetic any mind had it not been put on display.  By singling her out as different, some other children may see that difference as bad or negative.

    Once again, the construct of exposure rears its head. If people with disabilities had greater access to more opportunities, environments, activities, and settings, we would not need to engage in sensitivity training. By doing these types of trainings, we are attempting to justify their inclusion. We are saying, “See, they are just like us, only they are/have [fill in the disability].” This is very marginalizing. It reinforces that there is a “normal” and that people with disabilities are not “normal.” We need to teach children with disabilities about their disability and how to respond when people ask questions, and we need to teach the rest of the group how to respectfully ask questions of others when they are confused or curious.