Search Results

Allen McNair Exit 47 (2022) Purchase here Defining 'disability' Current debates within the Disability Studies community on how to define 'disability'. Through the years, scholars have refined past conceptual theories of the definition of disability. The purpose of refining the definition is to create a more accurate description that best supports receiving any needed support systems to have accessibility and to most efficiently describe the phenomena of disability. At times, past definitions have served as a foundation for discriminatory behavior and segregation. Due to potential implications, such as those, of the definition of disability, it serves an extremely important purpose. Below is a synopsis of the debate within the disability studies scholarly community. Choose for yourself what you feel most aligned with after learning a bit about each. These descriptions can then become a basis for doing your own research. Defining the term 'disability' can be just as complex as the wide range of conditions that qualify as disabilities. Many have pointed out the difference between the medical, social and human rights models. In addition to these, Essentialism, Post-structuralism, and Deleuzianism are three more theoretical models which elaborate past theories. ADA definition: "(A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities of such individual; (B) a record of such an impairment; or (C) being regarded as having such an impairment (ADA)" Here we see that the ADA definition of disability is focused on a medical condition, an impairment. Implications of defining disability in this way are that the focus is on an issue within an individual, not on society’s contribution to inaccessible spaces. This frame of thinking is linked to a Medical Model and Essentialist theories. Essentialism states that there is a normal body and body which is other than normal, different. The condition of the not-normal body is an abnormality that needs to be fixed. There will always be an outcast in this framing who needs to adjust to be part of the ‘right’ way of being. “Essentialism states that there is a normal body and body which is other than normal, different.” Following this line of thinking, the only thing that needs to be changed is the individual. They are not appreciated for their gift or strengths gained by performing in different manners. No one else, no other systems, take responsibility for outcasting the individual. Instead of honoring their way of existing, the focus is on the sickness, illness, or abnormality. Therefore, this definition does not allow for much room to create an accessible society. Disability Studies scholars responded to Essentialism... Scholars such as Judith Butler responded to Essentialism with Post-structuralist theories.  Michele Foucault and Judith Butler believe that the language we use constructs our daily lives and our entire reality. They argue against the term 'disability' and seek to deconstruct labels.  “It is easier to imagine blindness as the end of sight than it is to imagine it as a different way of being, as a different world” (Michalko, p. 50, 2017) . Here the focus is on living with different senses and strengths that arise from a different perception of the world. The fluidity of not labeling it as a medical condition or an impairment allows one to live without a sense of loss and instead embracing what their body, mind, and perception have to offer. Disability Studies scholars responded to Post-structuralist Theories... However, labels can serve an important purpose. One of the main purposes is to communicate and express so that others can understand what we're living through every minute of every day. Scholars such as Tom Shakespeare remind us that disability does not mean that someone is sick. Additionally, that disability is not just a product of discourse or labels, there is a real, embodied experience that impacts that person’s life that will need to be honored with a form of language. Some implications of Post-structuralist ways of thinking generate conclusions about using assistive devices. Using any support such as medication or hearing aids, can be a way of stating that the body needs to be fixed. A Post-structuralist states one can exist just as one is, the body doesn’t need to be fixed. However, this view doesn’t take into account the positive benefits gained by that individual who uses support in being able to participate to a greater degree in society. Another issue with deconstructing labels... Scholars like Aimi Hamraie remind that not owning the label can be related to some of the same issues brought up by the phenomena 'color blindness' where one may say they don't see race. Disability 'blindness' ignores the history of dehumanization, oppression, segregation, isolation, advocacy, and activism, as well as the current state of institutional ableism. In response to Universal Design, Hamraie states that: “Because they do not begin from an analysis of oppression, disability neutral discourses fail to capture the relational ethics of disability culture (Hamraie, p. 17, 2016).” Therefore, it's important to remember that there hasn't been an equal playing field for a very long time. Due to that inequality, people turned to advocacy and activism to educate, provide access, and lessen discrimination. If spaces are made to be accessible, this past and the embodied experience of their condition will still need to be honored. Interestingly enough, the category ‘disability’ has both othered us and, at the same time, provided the mechanics needed to get needs met in society. Deleuzian Deleuzian Disability Studies theories seek to take one out of a fixed state and into a constant state of becoming by analyzing the relationship between structures related to disability. This way of thinking allows for one to receive the support they need at the moment while allowing that to change and morph in time. These are the first theories that begin to apply systems thinking through applying the image of the rhizome from philosophers Gilles Deleuze's and Felix Guattari's theories and applying them to disability. The image of a rhizome becomes a way to map the network of structures impacting and impacted by disability. This form of dynamical systems mapping allows one to consider space for intervention and how that intervention will impact the system as a whole (Feely, 2016). The Take Away... The definition of disability has been updated and refined as scholars have discovered the gap in the past description. There is still room for growth. As we alter the definition of disability, the intersectionality of the experience becomes more apparent and so too does the political and social implications of the word. References Americans with Disabilities Act 1990 Berghs M, Atkin K, Graham H, et al. Implications for public health research of models and theories of disability: a scoping study and evidence synthesis. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2016 Jul. (Public Health Research, No. 4.8.) Chapter 3, Scoping models and theories of disability. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK378951/ Feely M (2016) Disability studies after the ontological turn: a return to the material world and material bodies without a return to essentialism. Disability & Society . 31:7, 863-883. Hamraie A (2016) Universal Design and the Problem of “Post-Disability” Ideology. Design and Culture 8:3, 285-309. New York: Routledge. Michalko R (2017) Blinding the Power of Sight. In Boys J (ed), Disability, Space, Architecture: A Reader (1st ed.). New York: Routledge, pp. 48-50.

First published on WIN Summit: www.winsummit.com Today, less women with disabilities have jobs, but studies show that greater flexibility can aid in furthering equity in the workplace. This is important because women with disabilities’ experiences remain hidden if organizational shifts are not made. If organizations create more accessibility, they have the power to preserve an embodied feminine wisdom of disability.   According to the United States Department of Labor’s and the Office of Disability Employment Policy’s recent report, women with disabilities are the lowest employed in the United States. This report, which gathered data from 2019 to 2022, seeks to identify labor force participation by gender and disability/ability (Rosenblum et. al., 2023). This report adds to past concerns of inequity in the workplace.   When organizations ask themselves how they can be more accessible, the hope is that they open themselves up to the perspectives of employees with disabilities. Yet, many organizations struggle with this question even though the answer is simple. Be even more open to negotiations about accommodations.   Here, I outline some of the primary challenges women with disabilities face in today’s workplace, adding context to a complex issue. And offer tips for organizational leaders on how to open the doors to more women. Challenges: Context Matters “As women with disabilities are uplifted and included, they will close gaps and liberate all as they liberate the disabled body.” Many women with disabilities feel disadvantaged before they even reach the negotiation table.  The lack of work opportunity and situated context hinder accommodation negotiations. This context includes difficulty in getting a job and a greater need for support systems that come with it, like health care. Therefore, there is a high dependency and higher risk if she were to lose the job. Caught in a position of less means or options and higher dependency on the role, her communication may be restricted (Coleman et. al., 2012). This context coupled with societal backlash and repercussions women receive when speaking up for their selves ( Amanatullah et. al., 2010 ) negatively impacts negotiations for accommodations.   Unsupportive organizational structure further complicates the communication for accommodations. In her Towards a Feminist Theory of Disability , Susan Wendell states, “disabled women struggle with both the oppressions of being women in male-dominated societies and the oppressions of being disabled in societies dominated by the able-bodied” (Wendell, 1989, p. 105). This means that when negotiating their needs at work, women with disabilities are facing compounded suppressive structures.   Furthermore, the typical day of a person with a disability likely looks very different than an abled person. Some of this schedule provides hints at where they can fall through corporate cracks. For example, it’s expensive and time-consuming to have a disability: medications, various therapies, regular doctor visits, specialist visits, alternative modalities, surgeries, and more. Travel time to and from, time spent in these services, and fatigue from the upkeep of all of this in addition to navigating spaces that are inaccessible are the norm - and they are also an addition to the expected daily work demands.   If corporate spaces are not identifying ways to specifically mitigate these challenges, they will have limited opportunity for growth. The fact that less women with disabilities are employed means that there is less representation of them. A corporate space may think they are accessible yet without the vital input of these women, they won’t know just how many people they’re leaving out. As women with disabilities fall to the unemployed bucket, their concerns are not heard, and their experiences remain unknown. The system of ableism continues without friction to the status quo.  Negotiating a Path Forward Being More Inclusive As an Organization   While people with disabilities have been excluded or underrepresented in the workforce, due to preconceived notions or stigma about capabilities, we’ve seen an increase in conversation and activism around accessibility.  The learning curve for many business owners and managers is still steep. Fraught with misunderstanding, many employers feel uncertain about how to be more accessible to people with disabilities. Here are a few ways organizations can reframe their conversations around accessibility. 1.              Flexibility At Work Workplace flexibility can support employee’s ambitions, and offers employes the ability to deal with unexpected situations. It’s been shown in study after study that men and women with more flexible work options feel more productive and less burnt out across the board.  Another major benefit is that flexible work options have the power to create more inclusion. From 2020 to 2022, more women with disabilities became employed due to expanded work environments. The report highlights that remote work options have helped bring more these women into the labor force.   2.              The Ripple Effect Updating an organizational system to include more women with disabilities will have a ripple effect by impacting the gender and pay gap as well as ableist and male dominated systems. Equipped with this knowledge, make it a point to spread awareness about disability. Disability aware systems and workplaces are making a difference by impacting the existing disparities. As women with disabilities are uplifted and included, they will close gaps and liberate all as they liberate the disabled body.    3.              Open Lines of Communication Workplaces, remember to create a variety of informal and formal avenues for communication. The situated context and societal repercussions hinder communication even when there are avenues. It is important to bring awareness to this and account for it as you are asking for feedback. Also, it is important to make changes as concerns are raised which demonstrates it is safe to share feedback and the changes your organization makes can pave the way for more people with disabilities to be employed. Be flexible and, overall, embody a growth mind state and desire to learn. Empowering Yourself as A Woman With A Disability “ Self-advocacy is counterintuitive to some of our conditioning as women. One way to shift this is to use Conflict Intelligence.” Unfortunately, women with disabilities are also much more likely than women overall to have considered leaving the workforce or downshifting their careers. With organizations are slowly becoming more open-minded, self-advocacy remains important. Although advocating for yourself can seem daunting, you don’t have to do it alone and becoming confident in your self-advocacy skills can help you express yourself more authentically. 1.              Self-Advocate with Conflict Intelligence Self-advocacy is counterintuitive to some of our conditioning as women. One way to shift this is to use Conflict Intelligence. Conflict Intelligence provides various strategies of engaging with your supervisor depending on the context. This theory divides context by collaborative vs. competitive, high vs low dependency, and the degree to which you care about the relationship (Coleman et. al., 2014). While strategic appeasement or unhappy tolerance may exacerbate a disability, seek for negotiated support and ask for help from external resources if you are in a highly competitive and low power position.     In addition to mapping the context, one way to consider asking for and accepting accommodations is to know yourself. Reflect on your strengths and weaknesses regarding the accepting or requesting accommodation process. Then, identify your needs: what do you want to achieve and what do you need to be successful at it?  Then move toward the intervention that will help you reach your goals. For example, evidence-based instruction to improve skills, accommodations, or modifications. The most important step is to make the ask with both self and other reflection.   2.              Band Together Join affinity groups. When you join with others you may find that you are not alone in some of your experiences. This can lead to a sense of belonging and community thereby creating greater ease and joy in the workplace. If there is not an affinity group within your organization – perhaps you can be the one to start one! Or, look for groups outside of your organization that can help foster a sense of community and offer insights on what others are doing to promote greater accessibility measures within their organizations.   3.              Find External Resources Strong networks have methods of weaving in external resources to allow for a constant flow of new information. A healthy network is one that has bridges between multiple groups within the organization as well as links to external organizations. This allows you to stay in contact with the support systems you need. Conclusion In conclusion, context and systemic structure both matter when considering negotiating for accommodations. There are strategies to use to remain adaptive to the situation. The awareness of this may help you to keep your job or negotiate what you need during the hiring process. As difficult as it may seem, pressuring the organization to meet your needs ensures they aren’t deprived of the unique and amazing wisdom you have to share.    References Amanatullah, E.T. & Morris, M.W. (2010).  Negotiating Gender Roles:  Gender differences in assertive negotiation are mediated by women’s fear of backlash and attenuated when negotiating on behalf of others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98 (2), 256-267.   Coleman, P. T., Kugler, K. G., Bui-Wrzosinska, L., Nowak, A., & Vallacher. R. (2012). Getting down to basics: A situated model of conflict in social relations. Negotiation Journal, 28(1), 7-43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1571-9979.2011.00324.x   Coleman, P. T., & Ferguson, R. (2014). Making Conflict Work: Harnessing the Power of Disagreement. Houghton-Mifflin-Harcourt.   Rosenblum, D., Costa, J., and Ruth, A. (2023). Women with Disabilities and the Labor Market . https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ODEP/pdf/Women_with_Disabilities_and_the_Labor_Market.pdf     Wendell, S. (1989) Toward a Feminist Theory of Disability. Hypatia , Vol. 4, No. 2, Feminist Ethics & Medicine, pp. 104-124.

Critical-Postmodern Framework of Organizational Power Speaking up for accommodations isn't always easy. Social dynamics like group pressure, expectations, and structures of power are often not taken into account when organizations consider themselves accessible for employees with disabilities. The Critical-Postmodern Framework of Organizational Power can be applied to analyze these dynamics and open lines of communication between supervisors and junior employees who may have a disability. Tool to Analyze Organizational Power “Social dynamics like group pressure, expectations, and structures of power are often not taken into account when organizations consider themselves accessible for employees with disabilities.” There are multiple levels of challenges in speaking up or using accommodations. In addition to any social dynamics involving both inter and intra personal aspects, organizational power also plays a role. The Critical-Postmodern Framework of Organizational Power (CFOP) provides a theoretical lens to analyze organizational power. This theory analyzes how power gets translated at a relational (person to person) level, structural (policies and systems) level, and cultural (underlying beliefs and assumptions) level. I apply this theory to unearth important organizational structures for employees with disabilities. CFOP theory states that “power manifests itself in being able to define things” (Coleman et. al., p. 242, 2003). In CFOP, those creating meaning are the leaders of the organization. Those deciding what a reasonable accommodation is maintain power. This meaning gets transmitted relationally, structurally, and culturally. These three modes all relate - changing one impacts the rest. In order to make lasting change in a protracted conflict, each mode must be addressed. Therefore, to create lasting change, the way people relate to one another, the policies, and the culture within an organization must be addressed. Avenues for Communicating Oppositional Views According to CFOP, dismantling organizational power structures begins with providing formal and informal avenues for communication. One of the main findings of CFOP is the need for suppressed voices to have an avenue for speaking up. The CFOP Table is used as a diagnostic and analytical tool for measuring the quality/type of avenues for speaking up. The table distinguishes oppositional discourse avenues for the marginalized vs privileged, conscious vs automatic ways, and applies this to each mode (relational, structural, cultural). CFOP states that out of the three modes, the cultural mode is one of the most unconscious and powerful. “Controlling another human being’s subjectivity is perhaps more abusive than direct coercion” (Coleman et. al., p. 242, 2003). Cultural modes are felt as undercurrents in the organization. How do the employees, middle managers, or executives experience the pressure to maintain the status quo? Social Repercussions Impacting Motivation to Speak Up “There are many subtle repercussions for speaking up that directly impact an employee with a disability’s need for community and belonging." There are many subtle repercussions for speaking up that directly impact an employee with a disability’s need for community and belonging. For example, one who speaks up may be outcasted. Other employees may work collaboratively with each other and competitively with the one who spoke up. In this case, supervisors may favor the one who spoke up less and do things to make it difficult for the employee. When other employees group up with the supervisor they may be hypercritical to the employee, attempting to point out mistakes more so than to other employees who make just as many or more. This can significantly affect the mental health of the employee who spoke up. As Deutsch's Crude Law then illustrates, the employee will likely become more competitive as they feel that they’re in a competitive working environment. This sets up the ideological environment of the space, most of it is very difficult to describe directly. The tension can build until someone decidedly changes it, the employee leaves, or something more harmful happens (Coleman et. al., 2022). In Conclusion, In conclusion, to create an accessibility informed workplace, leadership must bring awareness to the way they are defining accessibility and accommodation. They must provide methods of speaking up with sensitivity to potential social repercussions. These avenues of communicating oppositional discourse would be built in at the relational, structural and cultural levels as well as applied to marginalized vs privilege and conscious vs automatic. References Coleman, P. T. & Voronov, M. (2003). Power in groups and organizations. In M. West, D. Tjosvold, & K. G. Smith (Eds.), The International Handbook of Organizational Teamwork and Cooperative Working (pp. 229-254). John Wiley & Sons. Deutsch, M. (2014). Cooperation and competition. In P. T. Coleman, M. Deutsch, & E. C. Marcus (Eds.), The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice (3rd Edition). Jossey-Bass.

Go to the Disability Services Office! A short reflection on advocating vs. not. You were gonna leave me behind, didn’t even blink an eye. I had to kick, scream, and cry to get you to see me. It’s a full time job on top of a full time job; navigating the healthcare system, advocating for myself, navigating the disability services system. If I don’t speak up, no one knows. If I don’t do this, you’ll continue on without me. It doesn’t impact you, you could care less. I’m the one who has to fight to be in this social space - negotiate, back to back appointments, updating forms, paperwork, accommodations, making sure all departments are in communication with one another. The job never ends, I’m the one who has to do this just so that I can participate, just so that I can join in. This is my experience, every day, along with my disability which is embodied - in my body. There is no 9am-5pm, go home, turn it off. This is my life. I’m exhausted. *The first couple lines were to society in general. The other section was written in response to a school administrator who told me to reach out to Disability Services. Although he meant well, what he didn’t realize is that I’m more aware than any of them what I lose if I don’t advocate for myself. I’m doing all of the above so that I can be in the classroom and it’s a testimony to my desire to be there. No one cares more than me. And him telling me to go to the DS office felt like it really downsized all the work I put in and I felt like “who are you to tell me this, I have to do this to be here.” And of course, I do reach out to the DS office months before I’m even supposed to. I took it defensively at the time and didn't really need to because he was obviously trying to connect me to resources. Yet I still needed to give voice to the moment in time through this reflection.

Written during quarantine. My community has been threatened for a long time. When their community was threatened they adjusted, and quickly. As a response to the pandemic, governments created mandatory quarantines. The quarantine is a form of a collective, forced exile. Every country around the entire globe created its own mandates shutting cities down and forcing people to stay at home. Many struggled to get out of a country they were visiting and get home immediately. Many were forced to stay in the country they were visiting, even if it wasn’t home. Those who were in their home country were internally exiled to the confines of their home. At an individual level, however, I had a different experience. I have felt metaphorically exiled for most of my life; like an outsider who doesn’t belong. Due to neuralgia and chronic pain, I often don’t leave my house and if I do, I don’t go far. I don’t participate in many social activities because I’ll end up in pain very quickly and then I can’t talk or socialize because the pain becomes so loud it takes over everything. I tend to stay home where I know I can manage pain levels. If I do travel, I’m greatly supported and have time for recovery, I then explore near where I’m staying to ensure that I can get back quickly if in too much pain. Even within my own body, I feel exiled due to the stainless steel within and up and down my spine. Through the forced exile of quarantine, I found a community. Since everyone had to stay home, everything became remote. I was finally able to join the university community, student organizations, academic conferences, social events, exercise classes, and more. The whole world opened up for me. I was able to go back to school and finish my Bachelors degree after a twelve year leave of absence. Being trapped in one’s body, and one’s home is an experience that I long ago made peace with being bedridden after my first surgeries. There is much richness to be found there if we let ourselves find it. I hope that as the world recovers from the pandemic, people don’t forget what was gained by exploring oneself and staying home. I hope that remote continues to be an option as it has allowed us to remain a community even during isolation. My experience may not be appropriate given the devastation and depression that everyone has experienced being separated from families and community; not able to share meals and the richness of togetherness. However, it is my experience nonetheless. I’ve felt divided for a long time, and now everyone feels divided, even if not forced to be, then voluntarily through the fear of possible infection. We’ve been through something truly incredible, and we all went through it together, which makes it all the more remarkable.

Social movements and activism as a method to reach for power in a world content with sidelining us. Untitled, 2023 Alex Becerra, Arts of Life Circle Contemporary Purchase here Non violent social movements can and have shaped policy. People with disabilities’, for example, right to work is a result of strategic, organized, collective public disobedience. Through actions like marches - even crawls - sit-ins, and social demonstrations advocates fought for the right to work. Restricting non violent protests and these acts from civil society would then also restrict some of the main ways policy has been propelled forward. Social movement theorists have stated the importance of networks such as colleges, social media, work, unions or more. The disability rights movement has risen and settled in waves that span across time. The first disability rights organization was formed in 1880 and movements have continued to mobilize to the present day. Access and the right to work were key themes in each movement. Structures were built for one type of body only, making them inaccessible to others with limited mobility automatically segregating them from the richness of participation; participation, whether it be in education, playground fun, or the workforce. Richness was lost in both a figurative and a literal sense. Those with disabilities couldn’t work in the structure as it was. The rise of capitalism further conflated social life and job status. The fusion of wage labor, productivity, and independence further segregated disabled workers. In this paper, I will briefly describe some of the networks, tactics and goals of the disability rights movement. I will then briefly describe the longest sit-in; the Section 504 sit-in. Because there are so many different types of disabilities and because each organization defined itself based off of a single disability, early on there wasn’t much cross-network communication between organizations. In fact, some groups even discriminated against certain disabilities in order to prop themselves up and reach their ultimate goal of participation in society. For example, in 1880 the National Association of the Deaf overturned a civil service commission ban on hiring deaf workers. One of the tactics used in protesting equal employment was to exemplify their physical ability, citing language as the only difference between them and the majority of the population. This focus on physical ability created division between them and others who had mobility disabilities. The organization dwindled out after reaching their goal of overturning the ban. Yet their accomplishments shifted it from being illegal to legal to hire deaf workers. Nothing was given easily, we had to continuously apply pressure to be seen and heard and for systems of society to change. The 1930’s brought another wave of disability rights movements. Several organizations were formed at the local and national level. The National Association of the Blind, formed in the 1930’s, was the second to work the tactic of separating themselves from those with mobility issues. They focused on the fact that they were physically able to work and should be allowed to. Thus, within this singular movement for disability rights, they created divisions between themselves and other organizations to distinguish themselves. Yet at the same moment in history, polio had just spread rampantly for a decade prior and was still not eradicated. The President himself had a mobility disability due to polio and was a wheelchair user. This greatly paved the way for those with mobility disabilities to begin to gather and organize. The president founded Warm Springs Polio Rehabilitation Center, which provided a very important gathering place for others with polio. The group Polio Crusaders formed from attendees of the rehabilitation center. The demographic was largely middle class and white. Before 1964, black disabled citizens' segregation was compounded which has lasting impacts today. I will expand on this more in future blogs. The 1970’s gave rise to yet another wave of the disability rights movement. The legislation Rehabilitation Act was signed into existence in 1973 and there was an awareness of cognitive liberation; the feeling that things could really change. However, by 1977 Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act had still not been promulgated. The sit-in for Section 504 promulgation paved the way for future legislation to be passed supporting those with disabilities. Lastly, the successes of the 1970’s paved the way for the Americans with Disabilities Act to pass in 1990. Main Goals In one sense, there can be an analysis of the waves of protest through time. In another sense, there can be an analysis of the goals of the various movements. There were three main mobilizing factors of the disability rights movement. One main focus was the ability to work. The second was on deinstitutionalization. Prior to the 1970’s, parents were strongly encouraged to place disabled children into an institution. There they lived separate from society. However, most of the people there could get their needs met at home, with some additional assistance. Advocates mobilized to take people out of the institutions and provide better care for them at home, focusing on at home care and benefits. There was also a focus for better services within state run institutions. The third mobilizing factor was independent living. The focus was on providing assistance for disabled individuals so that they could live as independently as possible. Access to education, employment, and public transport were all key aspects of independent living. The third mobilizing factor was civil rights activism. Here, the focus was on anti discrimination and equal opportunity. This gave rise to something called full citizenship; political participation, physical access, and social and economic citizenship (Patterson, 2018). Longest Sit-In In 1977, the sit-in at the Department of Housing, Education and Welfare (HEW) began. Nixon’s administration had failed to promulgate Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. This Act was the first general disability rights legislation in the United States and was directly modeled after Section 601 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Section 504 was the anti discrimination portion of the Rehabilitation Act. On April 5, 1977, Judith Heumann and the organization Disabled in Action, led a march from the capital building to the HEW office. Demonstrations were held outside HEW offices in 9 different cities, but the San Francisco sit-in lasted the longest. Advocates left two days after HEW Secretary Califano signed regulations for Section 504, on April 30. They sat in for a total 25 days. Within this time frame the city cut off the power to the building. The Section 504 sit-in is an important event in history. It illustrates perseverance. Perseverance was nothing new for this group of people. Each day they persevered through a different lived experiene. In addition to this, they also faced the burden of a disabling society. Even still, that burden didn’t stop them from persevering through the discomfort and through the barriers; both physical and ideological. They were successful in promulgating the Section 504 legislation which laid the foundation for the Americans with Disabilities Act. In Conclusion, In general, the disability rights movement is rich, with organizations forming throughout almost every decade since 1880. These movements have used traditional forms of lobbying as well as focused marches, protests and even public displays of protest such as sit-ins and the ADAPT’s “Capitol Crawl”. Each one of these mobilizations was simply a call for participation in the life of one’s society. Anyone with a disability knows how important community, social life, and the ability to be a part of it is because they know what it means to be segregated from it. The successes of these movements are many, and yet there is still work to do. Bibliography Barnartt, S., and Scotch, R.K. (2001) Disability Protest: Contentious Politics 1970–1990. Gallaudet University Press, Washington, DC. Brown LD. Civil rights and regulatory wrongs: the Reagan administration and the medical treatment of handicapped infants. J Health Polit Policy Law. 1986 Summer;11(2):231-54. doi: 10.1215/03616878-11-2-231. PMID: 3745838. Greene, Kyra R. Disability Rights Movement (United States). Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2013. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration & Management. “Section 504, Rehabilitation Act of 1973”. US Department of Labor. https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oasam/centers-offices/civil-rights-center/statutes/section-504-rehabilitation-act-of-1973. Accessed 27 Feb. 2021. Patterson, Lindsey. The Disability Rights Movement in the United States. The Oxford Handbook of Disability History. 2018. Percy, Stephen L. Disability, civil rights, and public policy : the politics of implementation / Stephen L. Percy University of Alabama Press Tuscaloosa 1989 Scotch, Richard K. “Politics and Policy in the History of the Disability Rights Movement.” The Milbank Quarterly, vol. 67, 1989, pp. 380–400. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/3350150. Accessed 27 Feb. 2021.

W. Barnett Pearce reminds us that through the act of communicating, certain words imply a set of actions that must be coordinated with others to carry out the goal of that speech act. Speech Act The word accessibility is a “speech act”. This means that when the word is spoken, it implies that an action or a set of actions will occur. Barnett Pearce, and a variety of scholars (Searle, 1990; Pearce, 2007; Wittgenstein, 1953/2001; Kreckel, 1981), determined the term speech act denotes that we use language (verbal as well as non verbal) to accomplish various actions (Pearce et. al., 2007, p. 109). In part, speaking is an activity in and of itself. However, in addition to the act of speaking, a ‘speech act’ refers to the part of speech that is seeking to accomplish an action. When the word ‘accessibility’ is spoken it implies a set of actions coordinated by a variety of individuals to create the act of ‘accessibility’. “If those worldviews have different meanings of the speech act ‘accessibility’, there will be no coordination without negotiation." Coordination Since the speech act ‘accessibility’ implies a set of actions by a variety of individuals, this speech act must be made in coordination. Coordination is created when two or more differing sets of world views come together to accomplish an action. Differing worldviews coming together takes various acts of negotiation and clarification (strategic communication) in and of itself. Furthermore, if those worldviews have different meanings of the speech act ‘accessibility’, there will be no coordination without negotiation. Therefore, to accomplish the speech act with coordination each person must have awareness of their own worldview and the ability to learn about the others’ view. Perceptions What is accessibility? When the word is spoken by a supervisor, does it imply the same set of coordinated actions as it does when spoken by an employee with a disability? The supervisor and/or Human Resources may believe they have satisfied the speech act ‘accessibility’ by following the ADA policy for formal accommodations. Yet the person with the embodied experience of disability may have a very different set of actions in mind to perform the speech act ‘accessibility’. Personal Experience In my experience, Human Resources is concerned with satisfying legal requirements. They aren’t able to intervene any more than ensuring that the Doctor’s recommendations are upheld to the best of the organization’s ability. Their role could be expanded to include much more such as sharing supplementary resources, educational workshops and opportunities to meet with employees and supervisors. For example, when I began a new job, my supervisor didn’t know information about the disability services shuttle van, where to find that information, or how we could modify my tasks until my assistive furniture arrived. These are gaps that Human Resources could step in to fill. However, since they have satisfied their legal requirements their role ends. Therefore, there are missed understandings and missed opportunities to perform accessibility in other ways as the coordination of the speech act ‘accessibility’ is static. References Pearce, B. (2007). Making Social Worlds: A Communication Perspective. Blackwell Publishing.

"Pain medication so you can do life our way," But what does the pain have to say, does it need to be erased, Does it have a message, A soul of its own, A wisdom, a teaching, a wish to find a home, How does it transform, through methods of honoring and speaking to it, When we see it, there is so much we learn. What are we missing when we don't take the time to stop and listen? Can we take the time when we're rushed, pressured and pushed to keep up? Pain; does it have a soul of its own, that must be recognized, seen, and honored, not condoned? Disclaimer: This is simply one thought amongst millions of thoughts I've had about taking the medicine prescribed to me by my Doctor. I support everyone taking medication prescribed to them. I see the need for it and the positive benefits. I am not in any way supporting not taking medication.

Economic Valuation and the Ranking of Humans Society, and the population as a whole, enact a ranking system every day, all the time. This ranking system is a valuation system that ranks humans by their corresponding value. Their value is derived from how well they participate in society. How well they participate in society is derived by how much profit they produce. However, the profit produced is not how much profit they produce within an infinite amount of system possibilities. The system is set. The profit is produced within this set system. This set system is a capitalist economy which establishes profit first; profit to drive every other factor. Therefore, the system we are judged by is a system that was formed by profit first, then unfolds all other functions from this underlying principle. “Does the structure of our profit driven economy create the basis for the exclusion that those with limited mobility experience within society?” This type of ranking system did not begin with mankind. It began with colonization. In order to conquer over a person, colonizers had to establish a disconnect from the human and a constant refocusing to profit-first systems. Set systems were put into place all over the world. Beforehand, systems were alive, adaptable, and flexible given the geographic location and specific population. All contributions were accepted and honored as value. People were placed in roles that were supportive to them and their bodies. Afterward, systems were concrete and set, a generic one size fits all. This type of system is what rules today. It is this ranking system that is the reason why those with limited mobility are excluded. It is the reason why society has ranked and assigned value based on how much profit one contributes. Colonization established many profit centric systems that valued profit over human life and systems that we still follow today. In this series... I’m studying those with limited mobility in relation to the profit driven economy because I want to find out whether the design of the market creates social isolation and a devaluation, in economic terms, of those with limited mobility in society as a whole. Does the structure of our profit driven economy create the basis for the exclusion that those with limited mobility experience within society? Assigning value to people began within the workplace, the value assigned was based on how much they produced. That value judgment then became justified with the argument that some genes are stronger than others and the weaker genes should die off. All of this goes into society's preconceived notions about those with disabilities. In this series, I will provide a brief history of types of economies and review the literature within disability studies and economics.

A Brief Glance at the History of the Laborer and Economic Theory of Value Each economy throughout history has had its way of placing value on each laborer. Society has then assigned a hierarchy that is based on one’s career. The fact that the ranking system taking place is based on careers demonstrates how closely linked worth and work are. “The fact that the ranking system taking place is based on careers demonstrates how closely linked worth and work are.” Early Agricultural In early agricultural societies we find an example of the type of situation wherein a person can be assigned value directly based upon their production. The laborers, here, represent those members of society who are able bodied, strong and fit. These civilizations were set up around the most profitable industry. The most productive class was considered to be the farmers, then down to proprietors such as merchants. The sterile class was considered those who charged a fee for land; landlords (Mazzucato, 2016). Tools were used  for the purpose of producing as much as possible. The value of each laborer was in how much they could produce. The value of the business as a whole, lied in how much crop they could produce. In this model, each person’s worth lies in the amount of their production, thus quantifying the worth of a human soul. With such an intricate tie of self worth to production thus the race to production followed, of course, because who doesn’t want to be valued? Industrial Revolution In the 1800’s, the industrial revolution changed the value definition of a laborer. Hints of that change show us that the “price of labor is revealing their value” (Mazzucato, 2016). If the laborer is paid more, they are perceived as worth more. During this time, there is a rise of technology being used for production. The inventions were used to increase efficiency of production and maximize profit. At this time there are variances made between value creators and value takers. The labor theory of value focus is on reproduction. Neo-Liberalism The rise of neo-liberalism of the 1970’s to now has led to great innovations in technology and also an update on the way we view profit. There is a focus on how individuals make decisions with the advent of opportunity cost and profit (Mazzucato, 2016). Only now is economics beginning to factor in underlying motivations of choices through opportunity costs, but it is still multiplying that factor by the financial profit created in order to identify the laborer’s worth. Underlying Principles Beginning from a principle like this will always be limited. It is not coming from a human first model allowing all following operating systems to mimic the human body or allowing for the whole within many wholes of the human body to be the most valuable factor and point to begin from. Not only is defining civilization in this way, as a capitalist economy, limited, but it’s also dangerous. The danger lies in assigning worth and value to humans based on how well they can operate within the capitalist system. When we define value in this way, a large portion of humans are left out; are devalued. When people are devalued they will be left out even more. Thus that cycle compounds on itself. “Once each life has a value which may be calculated, and some lives have less value than others, such a politics has the obligation to exercise this judgment in the name of the race or the nation" (Rose, 2007). When people are devalued, their human rights are at risk. When people are devalued, they are not able to fully participate in society. They are not able to fully enjoy and embrace life and be embraced and enjoyed in return. As the person could not participate in profiting the society, they were seen as an outlier. As they were not bringing profit, they were not valued. Theoretical frameworks were established in order to support the ranking system. Two examples of such are the theory of eugenics and the Protestant workplace ideology. The rise of sterilization based on eugenics in the 1920’s and 30’s displayed how effective this theory is. Eugenics argued that there were those who were fit and healthy, balanced individuals. And that there were deformed, unable to participate, outliers who should be sterilized. However, The irony of this is that when we create human first systems, more profit is generated. When employees feel embraced, they create more. A survey study done and written about in the Harvard Business Review states that, “employees who feel welcome to express their authentic selves at work exhibit higher levels of organizational commitment, individual performance, and propensity to help others" (Goffee et. al., 2013). The research in this study showed how embracing the unique selves of your employees actually creates more profit for one’s company. Citations Goffee, R and Jones, G. (2000). Why Should Anyone Be Led By You?. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2000/09/why-should-anyone-be-led-by-you Mazzucato, M. “What is economic value and, who creates it.” Ted Talk Summit Conference. Published on July,  2019. Ted Talk video, 18:47. https://www.ted.com/talks/mariana_mazzucato_what_is_economic_value_and_who_creates_it. Rose, N. 2007. Politics of life itself: biomedicine, power, and subjectivity in the twenty-first century. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

In my Honors Thesis research paper, I wrote about how institutional ableism is taught at a young age and then reproduced throughout one’s life mainly due to lack of lived experience and lack of educational experience of disability. I identify this conditioning is because of covert processes, such as messaging in the spatial layout and absence of disability studies in education. The classroom is a place where the young learn world views. There they develop a sense of self and a support system to succeed in life. It is one of the most impactful spaces for early development and socialization. In school, familiar processes such as interacting only with abled children, are learned and reproduced throughout the rest of the child’s life. Children with (dis)abilities are divided from other students. They are taught separately and socialize separately. How do power dynamics implicit in built space impact children with and without (dis)abilities? “An understanding of how disabled people have become marginalized and excluded within society cannot be understood without an appreciation of the sociospatial processes that reproduce social relations (Kitchen, 1998).” Architecture & Ideology Due to the fact that ideology cannot be separated from built space and that the structures we create will always be a reflection of the ideology, when buildings are inaccessible that demonstrates that the ideology is exclusionary. I have found that exclusionary ideology is taught at a young age. Built space exemplifies power. But it doesn’t have to, as Dinulovic reminds. When “function of” architecture becomes inclusion, then built space is also a pathway for a transformation. Yet this requires architects to have both lived (secondary is fine) and academic experience of disability. Power in Built Space: Disability Studies Scholars Disability Studies scholars like Paul Hunt have identified disability as a result of our ideology, for example the social model that he created with others states that disabling structures segregate the person from participating fully in society and if those structures are changed, people with disabilities can participate more fully. Therefore, the ideology of institutional ableism represented through built space is a disabling factor. Other scholars focus on that having a condition of some sort is not an ending but a beginning of a new way of living, not a loss but a different way of living (Michalko, 2017). Other scholars remind us that built structures tell us what's appropriate and what’s not appropriate in terms of how to hold our body (Crowe, 2017). Or that in building and in the process of design, we make an assumption about what is to be valued and noticed, and what is to be marginalized and forgotten (Boys, 2017). Classroom This ideology is learned in the classroom through division into separate classrooms and many times separate school that have no joint activities, as well as different recess times, is reflective of sequestration into institutions. The children learn and socialize in divided spaces. “An understanding of how disabled people have become marginalized and excluded within society cannot be understood without an appreciation of the sociospatial processes that reproduce social relations (Kitchen, 1998).” Children of different abilities learn and socialize in a separate space divided from other children. Scholars have found that a development and emotional intelligence gained by doing things together, abled children develop understanding of diversity, unique abilities, empathy,  disabled children develop to a greater degree ( as would any child) when they can socialize with peers. Interview The expert interview demonstrates the importance of creating more opportunities that build a lived or educational experience of disability so that architects are not attempting to design something that they only have formal knowledge of, if any at all. Existing Data Burke is advocating for playgrounds that use Universal Design, she argues that the division that occurs when children have to use different equipment depending on their ability is the cause of a negative emotion linked to disability. Burke’s research can be applied to the ideal, typical elementary school classroom by understanding that playing together is more important to children than differences of capabilities. Accessible technology or structures must be coupled with education about the history of disability advocacy. Steps toward inclusion could include playing games that are accessible to everyone during recess, after/before school, or for physical education. Correspondingly, that not being able to play together can create a negative connotation with (dis)abilities (Burke, 2006). Deleuzoguattarian assemblage analysis takes into account each component of the whole system and does not assign full responsibility to one part but instead looks to improve the relationship between the parts these include discursive conversation of the issue, biological, discursive, technological, and economic. Built structures send spatial messages about who is in and out of place. When we keep children with (dis)abilities separated it teaches “abled” children that their world functions without people with (dis)abilities. These are covert conditionings that stall the movement toward accessibility. In this movement, architecture becomes an incredibly powerful tool as both a way to examine the dominant ideology, and also, as an opportunity to shape an ideological shift. When teaching methods and use of space are updated, the classroom becomes a space for transformation. Due to the beautiful and intricate relationship of architecture and ideology, the elementary school classroom can change the future. Now in my Master's degree in my program at Columbia University, we’re taught to practice conflict mapping using systems theory. When we place Institutional Ableism at the center of the map, accessibility movements and all the past advocacy inhibit it, while ignorance due to lack of education and experience enable this intractable conflict.

Coordinated Management of Meaning (CMM) techniques can be used to facilitate shared meaning of disability and accessibility. Coordinated Management of Meaning (CMM) has powerful implications in the workplace for understanding the experience of employees with disabilities. The understanding CMM fosters is through narratives, influences and operating forces. Through my CMMI Fellowship, I am currently developing a framework that will be used for organizational change consulting to walk participants through the SEAVA process and facilitate conversations about disability. Co-Create with CMM “In this space of both reflection and agency, afforded by the CMM tools, each party can understand the other in a deeper way and together determine a pathway forward.” An extraordinary aspect of CMM is that the variety of techniques grounds the parties in the present as they navigate through the past. This approach allows participants to discover both themselves and each other. The discovery is characterized by each person sharing their reality of the episode. In this space of both reflection and agency, afforded by the CMM tools, each party can understand the other in a deeper way and together determine a pathway forward. Therefore, CMM can be used to facilitate conversations about disability and foster a powerful internal shift. Conflict resolution framework combines with CMM In the movement toward #accessibility in the workplace, there are many absent conversations regarding the social experience of accommodations. More specifically, those wanting to have these conversations may feel silenced due to the unique combination of power, (defined in the formal sense of status due to organizational roles) dependency, (benefits from the job and/or accommodations to do their job), and dynamic (collaborative or competitive), as laid out in the situated model of conflict (Coleman et. al., 2012). These social dynamics inhibit conversations meaning that people can continue to operate unaware of how their actions impact employees with a #disability. Personal Experiences “I discover the many narratives which I carry with me impacting my communication.” I have a personal connection to this goal because I have experienced a variety of issues in the workplace related to #accommodations. For example, supervisors storing items on my assistive furniture, assigning me tasks without being aware of my accommodation plan, or requesting me to move my furniture to different buildings on my own. Furthermore, gaps in #communication from Human Resources about workplace accommodations compound the issue. When I consider my response, I discover the many #narratives which I carry with me impacting my communication. Participating in this discovery process with others in the workplace could create a powerful shift fostering a deeper understanding of disability. Application The situated model of conflict applied to this context highlights that an entry level employee with a disability may experience a difficult time speaking up due to the level of power, dependency, and dynamic of the #relationship between parties. If left unaddressed, the hidden issues can lead the employee to disengage, isolate, or lose their sense of agency; all of which are compounded by the experience of their condition in relation to social participation. Due to this link, these instances of potential conversation around issues related to their work accommodations can be especially transformative if they have the right tools and resources to respond, or particularly harmful if they don’t. The SEAVA process in CMM Solutions: Field Guide for Consultants teaches the application of a comprehensive combination of CMM tools (Sostrin et. al., 2012). By using the complete #SEAVA method, each tool weaves into the next, walking the participants through a journey to ultimate transformation, if the parties choose. For example, the Daisy Model can highlight the influences each party brings to the conflict (Pearce et. al., 1999). Furthermore, the #LUUUUTT model can unearth vital wisdom of all involved including organizations; the many stories unheard, unknown, and often even untellable (Jensen et. al., 2018). As in the Field Guide, I too want to develop a framework which incorporates CMM tools through the SEAVA process to provide a cumulative experience for the impacted parties. Therefore... This targeted form of workplace consultancy is important because a better work environment results from people feeling that they can express and #co-create shared meaning. When employees are settled, feel safe, and have the support they need, they are able to contribute dedication, passion, and ease to the workplace. When people have the communication tools they need, they can create a better social world by opening the lines of expression and understanding. These actions then expand out to impact the work culture as a whole supporting #inclusion and #belonging. In Conclusion... In conclusion, I believe the scholar practitioner method of applying #CMM frameworks to the organizational setting will be extremely beneficial. It will open barriers to participation thus allowing employees with disabilities more opportunities to contribute to life in a meaningful way. The CMM tools can inform a deeper level of accessibility. Furthermore, combined with the situated model of conflict can also highlight the unseen social forces such as pressure and dependency which influence communication and how they specifically impact an employee with a disability. References Coleman, P. T., Kugler, K. G., Bui-Wrzosinska, L., Nowak, A., & Vallacher. R. (2012). Getting down to basics: A situated model of conflict in social relations. Negotiation Journal, 28(1), 7-43. Jensen, A., Penman, R. (2018). CMM: A brief overview. https://cmminstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/65_CMM-BriefOverview.2018.pdf Pearce, W. Barnett (1999). Using CMM: The Coordinated Management of Meaning. A Pearce Associates Seminar. Sostrin, J., Pearce, B., & Pearce, K. (2012). CMM Solutions: Field Guide for Consultants, 2nd Edition. Lulu.com. ISBN: 97880557995592.