Posted in Developmental disability service system

How they talk about us in private versus public.

It was pretty offensive. I mean what was said, sometimes, outside of earshot of clients, was just appalling. I mean the manager of my building was referring to them as “retard” — “retard” I think was one of the terms he would use, they had other words, but they were derogatory words.

Of course what’s written up, and everything that’s said in public, and if you’d have gotten some promotional material from the ARC…

It’s dressed up about how, things about “client independence” and “self-determination,” all this wonderful stuff. And “achieving potential”, and all that wonderful crap. While it’s not actually going on. Also you can’t forget “caring” for people. Actually if what happened bore any resemblance whatsoever to printed material, both internally and externally, the material we were trained on, the written material we received during training, and the material handed out to parents generally on the outside who were considering placing their children in these kind of situations — adult children I might add. The literature. If anything that was being written is true, those would’ve been wonderful places. But none of it was true. I mean I was very often informed that “This is the way it’s written, but this is the way it’s actually done.” This is what’s written, this is what’s actually done. They would read off policies to us and the same person practically in the next breath would violate them. But we had to know what the official policies were, the official line.

Those institutions will grab onto whatever the current fad is, claim it for themselves, and twist it beyond all recognition. Name the trend, they will adopt the language and twist it beyond all recognition. I’ve oftentimes observed that the real difference between the supervised apartments that I worked in and any of the state hospitals I was in, was basically a coat of paint on the wall. You know, you change the color of the paint, paint it nice, and plunk a different picture on the wall or something, and hey, it’s a “supervised apartment” setting.

They put a coat of paint on the wall, and bang, it’s supposed to be different now. And they change the words, so as to match what everyone wants them to be, and then they go ahead and do what they’ve always been doing. One of the reasons I really hate it when organizations change names and labels and stuff like that. Because you can’t change anything by changing the name except maybe the stationery. Why not call it what it’s always been called? Don’t play games with names.

I don’t think the word self-determination should be used by absolutely anybody who is not themselves developmentally disabled, or otherwise disabled. That term should not be used by their caregivers. Ever. Because the caregivers do not have a right to it. Or so-called caregivers or whatever you want to call that. It’s debatable as to what’s provided is comparable to the word care, in the usual definition of the word.

I mean one of the things that I very vividly remember, to give you an example of some of what went on there: One of the guys there had a girlfriend who was also in some kind of group home setting. And they decided they wanted to get married. The official policy that we all learned was that these people are free to do what they want to, that it’s their choice, but the person at the head of the house just basically said, “No, he can’t go visit her anymore. No, they will not get married. Period.” Although she theoretically had no right to do so, and basically her argument was that this would just be too much work for us.

Which is typical of what goes on, the official, wonderful label versus the actual reality. They’re not the same. Ultimately those organizations are run for the convenience of the staff. And that’s exactly what you’ll get when all power lies with the staff.

-Laura Tisoncik, 2004 interview

In the above interview, Laura Tisoncik is discussing her work in the developmental disability system as front-line staff.  She herself has a developmental disability, but in this context she was staff, so she was able to see what staff said when they thought none of us could hear them.

I’ve often been in a position to hear how staff talk about us as well, for different reasons.  Sometimes people don’t believe I can understand what they’re saying.  So I get to hear some shockingly frank discussions of me and other people with developmental disabilities sometimes.

Also, just so you know, retard is not a word you should ever be using.  It’s like a knife wound to the gut for most of us.  I’m using it because I want to highlight what an ugly word is being used, a word that means you are not even fully human to any of us it is applied to.  (And it is applied at one time or another to all people with developmental disabilities regardless of diagnosis.  It comes out of an old term for intellectual disability, but when people say it to us and about us, they don’t restrict it to people with ID.)  But in general it’s not a word you should use.  It’s a word that says, “You are something less than a thing, something disgusting, something that shouldn’t exist, something that isn’t right.”  The damage it causes is considerable.

Yet even when they’re not saying it, they’re often thinking it.  And we can usually tell.  You don’t have to hear the word to feel its impact, if it has ever been applied to you in any serious way.

At any rate, this gets back to the snake words somewhat, in what Laura is saying about brochures.

But it also gets back to other things.

Which is that there’s a public face and a private face of how the developmental disability system sees us.

And the public face is that beautiful utopia promised in the brochures.

And the private face can be a hellish dystopia with the word retard around every corner, embedded in every action even when it is not spoken aloud.

People who work in the system get visibly nervous when they find out that some of my advocates and cognitive interpreters have worked in the system.

Because that means they know that my advocates won’t buy their bullshit.

A lot of people do buy their bullshit.

We are pressured into at least acting or feeling like we buy their bullshit.

Sometimes it really feels like everything should be wonderful.  But there’s always this feeling deep down in your gut telling you something has gone horribly wrong.

If you’re lucky, you’ll know there’s something wrong outside of you.

If you’re unlucky, you’ll decide there’s something wrong inside of you that you are not happy despite the utopia you are placed in.  And then you will squeeze yourself into tinier and tinier containers, trying to get out of the way of the system that is crushing you alive.

Meanwhile you have to fight for the system and say the system is great, because hey you’re not in an actual institution, you have your own home, you have things that are more than you ever expected you could have.  And if you say too many bad things, the VOR and their ilk will come along and use it to justify traditional institutions.

It’s really confusing.

But it’s enough to say, what they really think about us, and what they say they think about us, are two entirely different things most of the time.  Unfortunately, most of the world believes their public face.  They don’t see the nightmares many of us are living.  They don’t say what is said and thought and acted upon behind closed doors.

Posted in Developmental disability service system

Snake words: Person-centered

28515246_853835724800781_7289753595876125815_o (1)

Person-centered is supposed to mean that when they decide what support you need from the DD system, everything comes from what you actually need and want out of life and out of the support you’re getting.  It means that rather than forcing you into a ‘support model’, they look at what you need out of life, what you want out of life, and how you can get it.  And then they model it around your strengths, weaknesses, and desires.  That’s what it’s supposed to mean.

In the actual DD system, person-centered can end up meaning some weird shit.  Sometimes good shit, sometimes bad shit, but weird shit sometimes.

My case managers came back from a conference recently and were really excited about how much they’d learned about being person-centered.

Given the way they’d been responding to any request for support ever (like asking that someone help keep my cell phone charged, which they said nobody could possibly have time to do, it takes 30 seconds) among other things, I was skeptical.

So they brought out this worksheet, pictured above.

It’s like having a small social media profile printed out in your file.

It can be arranged or colored any way you want.  The finished sheet goes into your file.

And it has absolutely nothing to do with what person-centered is supposed to mean.


Posted in Developmental disability service system

Independence Theater

Mel gardening

Lots of people have heard of security theater.  Security theater is actions performed in public to convince the public that we are safer, but are really just for show and don’t make us any safer.  A good example of security theater is the way airports make a big show of security measures since 9/11, but have not become more secure and may actually make people less safe.  Wikipedia has a whole page on security theater.

The developmental disability system loves something I call independence theater.  Like security theater, it’s all a sham.  It makes it look like people with developmental disabilities are doing things ‘independently’.  Which makes for great pride within the agencies and their brochures about how much they’ve accomplished by encouraging our independence.  But actually they are usually creating extreme dependence of the worst possible sort, while only putting on a show of making us look ‘independent’.

One reason they do this is it’s less work for them to get us to do something physically ourselves (or appear to) than to do it themselves.  But another reason is they think independence is something magical that we should all strive for even if it harms us.  And the appearance of independence makes a lot of them feel warm and fuzzy inside, regardless of what is happening to us.

By independence, they mean physically doing something.  So they always consider it better, for instance, if we clean our own floors, than if they clean our floors.

People with developmental disabilities may have serious problems learning to clean floors, or cleaning floors once we have learned how.  These problems doing so may be physical or cognitive or both.  But they are there.  When we have problems doing these things, even if we can sometimes physically do them, forcing us to do it can lead to loss of ability to do other things when staff aren’t around.  For some of us, it can even lead to dangerous injuries:  I have severe osteoporosis and have fractured my spine without knowing how, I also have a condition that can turn a broken bone life-threatening without immediate medical attention — making me bend is not just wrong but dangerous.

Yet in the name of independence theater I have been made to bend over and weed gardens.  As a condition for participating in the gardening.  If I needed to go sit down to avoid heat exhaustion or osteoporosis-related injuries, I would no longer be allowed help taking care of my garden, and could lose the garden altogether.

I love gardening.  But there are ways of doing it safely, and there is sheer recklessness.  I was not given a choice to do it safely.  It was danger, or nothing.  At the time, I “chose” danger.  This was not a real choice.  I was not given real options.  I love gardening, I wanted to garden, and I was told this was the only way I could get help doing it.

So that picture above of me gardening.

I love the picture.  It is me doing something I love.  I have my hands in the ground, I was raised doing these things, it feels right, I wish I could garden more.

It is also a picture of me being subject to potential injury as the condition for doing something I love.

These are not the only two choices.

I could participate without injury if they didn’t insist on independence theater.

They don’t care, as far as I know.

They have asked me to bend over at home in ways that are medically not good for me.

They have asked me to wear myself out until I had no more brain left to ask for water and got so dehydrated I nearly passed out and had trouble breathing for weeks.

They have done the “I will only wash the dishes if you dry the dishes” thing.

It’s well-documented that I have medical issues that prevent these activities being safe.

It’s well-documented that many of the activities i’ve been asked to perform, I’m not actually capable of.  Despite years of ILS (Indepedent Living Skills) and ADL (Activities of Daily Living) training.  And that even when I do learn how to do something, it doesn’t make me able to use that skill on command, or use it safely.

Meanwhile, with all this talk about independence, they are actually creating extreme dependence of a very bad kind.

They want us physically independent no matter the cost or no matter what choices are.  But in other ways, they want us 100% dependent.

They want us dependent on their decisions about what is best for us.

They want us dependent on their decisions about what we are and are not capable of.

They want us dependent on their decisions of what we should be doing.

They even often want us dependent on them to decide what we want to do or ought to be doing in our free time, and how we can best do it.

They want us dependent on them to choose what will be done for us, how it will be done for us and what we must do for ourselves.  They don’t want us making those choices.

So independence theater is just theater.

And it’s dangerous theater.

And it’s mostly an illusion.

And being prodded around until you physically do something you don’t want to do or can’t do isn’t independence in any sense I’m aware of.

But they sure as hell love it.  And it gives them a great chance to neglect us while telling people (and even believing, themselves) that they’re really doing us a favor.  More of those snake words…


Posted in Developmental disability service system

Snake Words: Hiding the Dystopia

Lords and Ladies by Terry Pratchett

“Elves are wonderful. They provoke wonder.
Elves are marvellous. They cause marvels.
Elves are fant

astic. They create fantasies.Elves are glamorous. They project glamour.
Elves are enchanting. They weave enchantment.
Elves are terrific. They beget terror.
The thing about words is that meanings can twist just like a snake, and if you want to find snakes look for them behind words that have changed their meaning.
No one ever said elves are nice.
Elves are bad.”
― Terry PratchettLords and Ladies

(Apologies to actual snakes.  Snakes are cool.)

The DD service system loves to pretend that it is a utopia ushering us all into an age of inclusion and empowerment and lots of other nice words.  The problem is that for a lot of us, far from a utopia, it is a dystopian nightmare.

One way they protect the illusion that it’s all wonderful is by changing the meanings of words.  They have a talent for taking a word and turning it into its opposite.

They have a term, for example, dignity of risk.  What that term is supposed to mean, is that too often people with developmental disabilities are ‘protected’ from taking risks that other people are allowed to take.  We may be forcibly prevented from drinking alcohol, or having sex, in ways that other adults are not.  Dignity of risk is supposed to mean that we have the right to do things that agencies might consider risky or dangerous.

Here is an entire Wikipedia page on dignity of risk. 

But here’s how the system actually can use it:

Let’s say there’s something that you really need them to do.  The agency failing to do that thing will result in you being in danger.  You know this.  The agency has a duty to do this thing.  You want the agency to do this thing.

The agency does not want to do the thing.

So they set up an impossible set of hoops you have to jump through in order to do the thing.  When you can’t jump through the hoops, they tell you it is your own choice that the thing is not getting done.  If you really wanted it to get done, you would jump through the hoops.  The danger you now face as a result of their neglect will now be referred to as your choice and defended with the idea of dignity of risk.

So like the fact that until recently I hadn’t been bathed in a year or two?  Dignity of risk.  Except this is not a risk I chose.  It is a risk they chose for me.

See what I mean?  They can take a word, twist it inside-out, and turn it on its head.  Until they can justify taking away all your freedoms with language designed to protect your freedoms.

The DD service system is excellent at playing this particular word game.  It can be especially confusing if they use the right meaning of the word sometimes, but the wrong one most of the time.

Always, always look for the snakes behind the words.  Because they’re there. And in the DD system, they’re everywhere.  Every word or term that has an actual meaning that is supposed to protect our freedoms and rights as people with developmental disabilities, has an evil twin that looks exactly the same but exists to take away our freedoms and rights.

Look for the snake words.  Just look for the snake words.  If you understand how they work, they will give you a window into the dystopia a lot of us are living in.