Do We Have Enough Data on People with Disabilities?
Yesterday, on Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, the United States celebrated the pioneering achievements of a great 20th-century civil rights leader. Although Martin Luther King, Jr.'s agenda, when he was alive, was equality, justice and freedom for all African-Americans, the U.S. civil rights laws he helped enact in the 1960s had reverberations far beyond the community he fought for. For people with disabilities, the results of King's civil rights efforts helped give voice to a broad-based disability movement that started in the 1980's by campaigning against lack of adequate services for people with disabilities, culminating with the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Thanks to the efforts of disability leaders across the United States and around the world, people with disabilities enjoy a quality of life that surpasses that of their peers of earlier times.Yet, there is still much to be done. Last week, according to Disability Scoop, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that it "[wasn't] able to obtain a complete picture of the health experiences of people with disabilities as compared to others simply because too little information exists." In its report, titled "CDC Health Disparities and Inequalities Report -- United States, 2011," the CDC looked at income, race and gender and how they help predict whether a person is likely to be healthy or not healthy. Yet, compared to these factors, for which enough data was available for every one of the 22 topics it explored, the CDC could draw on data for people with disabilities for just eight of these topics.In other words, we as a country do not know enough about what Americans with disabilities experience with respect to their health. I am not an expert on health insurance, but it would not be surprising if medical insurers have a less complete picture of the health situations of people with disabilities compared to those by race or income, leading them to deny coverage for some people with disabilities where they most need it, or to set premiums that are out of alignment with what the data should show. For example, cochlear implants are mostly covered, but (cheaper) hearing aids are not covered for the most part. How much of that decision not to cover hearing aids is based on incomplete data? Hard to say, but it sounds plausible if there is unreliable data to guide actuarial decisions.Health care is a very sensitive political issue for this generation, and as an impartial writer, I do not choose to tread in the political debates on this issue. Yet, on the topic of coverage for people with disabilities -- many of whom are increasingly baby boomers who are approaching retirement age -- it is essential that there be complete and accurate data on their health experiences, so that insurers, legislators and citizens are better-informed on what actions to take with regard to insurance for them.That there is little data on the health experiences of people with disabilities, compared to other groups, is unfortunate. While more people with disabilities are living healthier lives thanks to better assistive devices and better services, there is still much to do to ensure they are treated on the same level as those without disabilities on every aspect of their lives -- including health insurance. Greater efforts to procure more complete data on people with disabilities would be a good start.
Designing A Potato Peeler For Everyone
I love cooking, so every holiday season my thoughts turn to Williams-Sonoma or Sur La Table. Shopping is one of my least favorite activities, but when I pass by one of these stores, I have an irresistible urge to go inside and seek the latest kitchen gadget. Some of my favorite gadgets come from OXO, a company that develops inexpensive, beautifully designed yet utilitarian products such as the Good Grips line of kitchen utensils.I like them because they are easy to use, comfortable on my hands, and possess a clean and simple design. It was not until years later that I learned OXO is a dedicated advocate of what is termed "universal design,"or the design of a product used by, and accessible to, everyone. So that potato peeler I was using apparently is easy to hold because it has a fat, non-slip grip handle. Good for people with arthritis (which I don't have -- yet). And that salad spinner can be used with just one hand, without holding the bowl. Nice.
Products manufactured specifically for people with disabilities, like wheelchairs, eye-tracking devices, and hearing aids, are examples of "accessible design" -- in other words, they carry no tangible benefits for people who do not have disabilities. On the other hand, universal design, or UD, products are designed for everyone including people with disabilities. These UD products are not specifically restricted to gadgets in the kitchen -- they include anything that is used by anyone, even building design. In fact, one of the most concrete examples of UD in action are long-running efforts to incorporate this philosophy into the construction and retrofitting of buildings. Rem Koolhaas' Maison à Bordeaux is an excellent example of UD: this house in France was designed for a man who was paralyzed after an automobile accident.That I did not realize my favorite kitchen gadgets were modeled on the principles of universal design is the whole point of this philosophy. UD products are meant to be accessible, unobtrusive, and used by everyone without even realizing that it is meant to provide access. North Carolina State University, a pioneer in UD, provides an excellent summary of UD guidelines here.One of the benefits of universal design is its potential to reduce the costs needed to retrofit and restructure buildings and services to accommodate people with disabilities, by incorporating accessibility features into the main design. Examples include trench drains in curbless showers and stepless entrances in multifamily housing complexes.
Another essential benefit of universal design, according to proponents, is to minimize the "separate but equal" stigma associated with accessibility features that, upon first look, appear to be specifically for people with disabilities. A wheelchair ramp that runs around the side of a building, with a guardrail that separates rather than incorporates, is one example of an access feature that is obtrusive and cannot be easily used by everyone. If the ramp can be meshed into the staircase, or inclines easily into the front entrance of a building in such a way that it can be used by everyone, then it is part of the aesthetics of the building, part of the main design, and is thus inclusive to everyone.Keep in mind that universal design is a philosophy. In practice, it is almost impossible for a product or building modeled on UD principles to be used by everyone regardless of capability. However, for the universal design concept to succeed, it should be used easily and comfortably by as many people as possible, whether young or old, with or without disabilities.From a business standpoint, universal design is a powerful way to maximize sales, by developing products and services that do not exclude any segment of the market based on age or ability. This speaks to the long-term success of OXO, which celebrated its 20th anniversary this year -- a testament to its ability to leverage universal design as an effective core competency, with products that delight its customers regardless of age or ability, and keep them coming back for more.In an aging world, led by baby boomers in developed economies, demand for disability-specific solutions has increased and will continue to do so. This demand is further fueled by the phenomenon of a growing population of people born with disabilities who are living independently, thanks to technology and an increasingly powerful disability movement. There is a place for accessible design that is geared toward the specific demands of people with disabilities. Yet, as more people with disabilities share living and working spaces with people without disabilities, both groups would like to easily, comfortably and happily use the same products and services without the need for expensive duplication. Properly implemented, universal design can reduce these resource and cost inefficiencies -- a win-win situation for both businesses and customers.Disclosure: I do not own any shares in OXO's parent company, Helen of Troy Ltd., or have a business interest in OXO.
New Survey On Employment of Americans With Disabilities
Since the Americans with Disabilities Act became law in 1990, there has been substantial progress in efforts among people with disabilities (PwDs) to be functionally equal members of society here in the United States. However, on one important marker of PwD participation in the larger society -- jobs -- there appears to be little improvement in the employment statistics of PwDs. Earlier this week, the Kessler Foundation/National Organization on Disability released the 2010 Survey of Employment of Americans with Disabilities, which found that "little progress has been made in closing the employment gap between people with and without disabilities since the passage of the ADA into law." Sue Robitaille explores this topic further on Abledbody.com.
Doctors With Disabilities
When we are in a hospital, we look to doctors to heal us, and nurses to keep us comfortable. Whatever condition we have that lands us in the hospital is always something that disables us, temporarily or permanently, and makes it challenging for us to live the life we take for granted. So, we trust and hope that the doctor, with all his/her training and knowledge, will diagnose what is troubling us, make us better, and send us on our way.What if you are scheduled for brain surgery next week, and the surgeon who is performing the operation has a hearing loss?What if you are lying on a bed in the ER, doubled over with pain in your abdomen, when the attending doctor comes over on her wheelchair and checks your vitals?Predictably, most patients will not care about the doctor's physical disability, as long as they know the doctor has substantial experience and achieved his deserved place in the operating room, ER, or hospital ward because of what he has done in the past. Unfortunately , there are some hospitals that enforce policies which make it very challenging for doctors with disabilities to effectively carry out their work.A wonderful article in the most recent issue of New Mobility profiles some doctors with disabilities who succeed at what they do, and takes a look at a U.S. medical system that still presents too many barriers that keep capable doctors with physical disabilities out of medicine." Read on...
Abledbody.com: The 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act
After passing in the Senate last week, the 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act, which will improve access to mobile content for the deaf and blind communities, will soon become law.This means deaf consumers can now watch closed-captioned shows and movies on the Web on their PC or mobile devices. Before, closed-captions were only available on TVs. Blind consumers will also benefit from limited hours of video-description services on the Web, and the law will require touch-screen smartphones that have Web features to be made accessible to them.To read the full article, click through to my original link on Abledbody.com.
Hotel des Invalides
During the first half of the 17th century, Europe was ravaged by the Thirty Years’ War, which pitted not only Protestants against Catholics, but also Bourbons against Habsburgs, and other religious and secular powers against one another. One of the major consequences of this war, which destroyed entire regions of present-day Germany and other parts of Europe, were the substantial injuries to tens of thousands of soldiers across several countries, including Spain, the German states, and France, often resulting in permanent and sometimes total disability for these soldiers.
In Paris, disabled French veterans of the Thirty Years’ War did not receive substantial protection or benefits. Anecdotal reports had some disabled soldiers being mistreated on Paris’ Pont Neuf, sometimes getting caught up in street fights. After King Louis XIV took over complete control of the French monarchy in 1661, he attempted to give relief to these veterans by relocating them to monasteries for their protection. Perhaps owing to the reduced role of religious powers and the increased power of the nation-states in the wake of the Thirty Years’ War, some disabled soldiers objected to the prospect of living in a monastic environment.Desiring the loyalty of his soldiers in advance of his plans for conquest, Louis XIV issued a royal edict in 1670 to provide aid and assistance to disabled French soldiers by establishing a major hospital in Paris for veterans with disabilities. He directed that “those who risked their lives and poured blood in defense of the monarchy… spend the rest of their days in tranquility.”
Over the next couple of centuries, the Hôtel des Invalides -- the hospital established by Louis XIV -- housed thousands of disabled or elderly soldiers. The hospital provided a template for other military hospitals that followed, the first being the Royal Hospital Chelsea in London (1682), and served as the precursor to today's military medical centers such as the Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C.Today, with more modern military hospitals in place, and a national welfare system that provides substantial benefits to French war veterans, the Hôtel des Invalides, officially known as Institut National des Invalides, no longer holds a central place in the treatment, recovery and convalescence of disabled French veterans. But it still plays a role as a retirement home and medical center for over a hundred French military veterans with disabilities who live on their pensions.In the shadow of the Eglise du Dôme which houses the tomb of Napoleon Bonaparte, the hospital provides a historic environment for its veterans. After we saw Napoleon’s tomb and stepped out into the courtyard, we could see several pensioners in wheelchairs conversing with each other. It felt less like an outdoor hospital lawn, and more like the green courtyard of a typical Parisian apartment building on a nice summer day. As Louis XIV would have put it, they spend "the rest of their days in tranquility."Author's Note: The term "invalid" -- a word not generally accepted in North America to describe people in wheelchairs -- appears to be used in Europe to describe soldiers who received permanent disabilities as a result of injuries suffered in war. As far as I know, aside from its historical connotations, this word is not in popular usage in Europe.
Let Your Fingers Do The Hiring: Part 2
Following up on everyone’s feedback and my response, I would like to add further clarity and color to my original article on Braille and employment.Born profoundly deaf, I often swam against the tide of popular opinion about deaf and hard-of-hearing people, just as successful non-Braille users did in swimming against the tide of popular opinion about blind and visually-impaired people which assumes that all blind people use Braille. While myriad educational choices were, and are, always available to deaf children – whether to teach speaking and listening, whether to teach sign language, or teach both, or follow other educational methods – conventional wisdom among uninformed (and I emphasize uninformed) hearing people was that pretty much all deaf people signed. This impression has made its way into popular media and informs general cultural discussions with regard to the deaf community. For that reason, many hearing people who approach me assume that I grew up relying on sign language to succeed, when that was never the case. I grew up learning to speak and listen, and did not learn sign language until I was 21 years old. Even then, sign language is not my primary mode of communication. I am most comfortable conversing in spoken English.This does not mean that I am against sign language. I am happily fluent in it, and have many deaf friends who I communicate with in sign language. I know many deaf people who have grown up being taught sign language, and have become successful and happy in their lives. Although sign language is the best known, and very popular, mode of communication in the deaf community, it is one of many different and equally valid educational flavors, each with its own strengths and shortcomings.For several decades until the end of the 1970’s, oral education for the deaf was implemented for as many deaf children as possible with little consideration for individual differences. While I have greatly benefited from oral education and count many other deaf friends who benefited as well, I cannot say that this approach was as beneficial for all deaf children. It was an “unmitigated disaster” for the deaf community in that many deaf children who otherwise needed sign language were denied it, sometimes by force. That is why in the 1980’s and particularly 1988 with the Deaf Power Now movement at Gallaudet, there was a backlash against oral education and increased interest in education through sign language, or bilingual education using sign language and English. This trend, however, was not helpful for some deaf children for which the oral or auditory-verbal option could have been more appropriate.By a similar token, uninformed sighted people think every blind person uses or should use Braille, when that has never been, and should never be, the case. Braille is not always appropriate for everyone in the blind community. That 90% of employed people know Braille means that the other 10% who are employed do not use Braille and still were employed.The point of my article is that Braille has become less accessible to blind people who have a need for it. It does not overtly say that Braille should be the be-all and end-all for every blind person, only that it is an essential tool to enable blind people to more effectively use the written word. My article is critical of the school administrators who made assumptions that non-Braille technologies are good enough for blind children, without examining carefully the skills and abilities of each child and whether that child has a need for Braille support. A school administrator who is extremely knowledgeable about the value of the Braille system, and extremely knowledgeable about the value of other assistive technologies for the blind, is in a much better position to evaluate the educational needs of a blind child than one who is not as knowledgeable. If that administrator says that this child does not need Braille to have a good education, then that administrator’s word carries far more credibility than the word of another administrator who cannot claim to have that level of knowledge. I take to task the educators who are not as informed or ignorant of the subtle and not-so-subtle issues in the blind community, and yet make decisions that impact the lives of blind children. This has unfortunately been a problem in the past couple of decades as the number of blind people using Braille declined.Technology is an empowering tool for people with disabilities, and also a tool that should be used carefully and appropriately – especially in cases where non-technological approaches can be just as beneficial, if not more so, to a person with a disability. I have had a cochlear implant (CI) for five years and I love it. Children as young as 8 months have undergone surgery for CI’s. The popular media has called the CI a device that “cures” their deafness and helps them to “hear again” (as if babies born deaf had ever heard sound in the first place!). This has given some parents the mistaken assumption that the CI will fix everything that is wrong with the baby’s hearing – when that is never the case. Consistent therapy, lots of elbow grease, and active parental involvement are essential to the educational success of a child implanted with a CI.This is the important rule that should be observed no matter what type of disability: evaluate each person on an individual basis, and evaluate that person well in the context of known tools, devices, and methods that have been verified to succeed for other persons with the same disability. It’s the approach I have tried to take in my writings and commentaries about issues relevant to people with disabilities, especially in the business world.
Let Your Fingers Do The Hiring: Responding to Your Comments
Last week, I wrote an article about Braille, the blind, and unemployment, titled, “Let Your Fingers Do the Hiring: Blind People and Employment.” With one exception to date, blind people I reached out to, or who posted comments on my blog, were positive in their praise of my article. My followup post is in response to a successful blind professional who wrote a point-by-point response that challenges the points I presented in my article. Given the points he made, his response is best addressed here in a full post instead of in the Comments section.Michael Squillace, a software engineer who is blind and does not use Braille, has posted his comments here in full. Below are my responses, with Squillace's comments in italics:
Since you have seemed to come up empty-handed in terms of finding information regarding, "..blind people who were able to lead quality lives without the use of Braille," let me assure you that there are plenty of us.
I stand by my article 100%. Perhaps some sentences could have been phrased better, but my basic argument remains unchanged.People who succeeded in their lives and careers without relying on Braille should definitely be recognized. When I searched on the web for, and inquired around about, blind people who grew up and how they were educated, I was very skeptical of the lack of information on blind people who were successful without Braille. I knew they were out there -- those 10% of employed and legally blind people who do not use Braille -- and I wanted to give them their due in my article, but I just had no empirical information available, and thus no stories to tell. After I posted this article, I emailed some blind people and advocates for the blind, and asked for their feedback. The comments of those who responded were uniformly positive, which surprised me given the fact that I could not find successful blind or visually-impaired people who do not use Braille.I would appreciate information on any blind people who do not rely on Braille and have become successful in their lives or careers. The more diversity, the better.Yet this is not the point of my article, which is about the decline of Braille as a result of decisions made by schools that were not well-informed and did not consider the whole spectrum of educational options available to blind and visually-impaired children. It is unfortunately an ongoing problem in other disability groups.
I resent the comment that our lives as blind persons have been an "unmitigated disaster" simply due to our not using braille, many of us by our own choice. You might just as well claim that blind people live intolerably horrible lives and have made little progress in the years since the Federal Rehabilitations Act because they did not receive, say, adequate orientation and mobility training, which many of us have not.
Yes, “unmitigated disaster” were strong words to use. There is no denying that 50% of blind people used Braille in the 1960’s and just 10% use Braille today, and that the statistics I show indicate the educational level among blind people have declined during that time. It is a disaster nonetheless, whether it was caused by declining use of Braille or other factors, and I was perhaps dramatic with the use of “unmitigated.” This does not mean that there are no blind people who have succeeded in their lives and careers without the use of Braille.This article in last December's New York Times was one of the guiding posts for my article. It examines both sides of the braille debate -- those who prefer to read print, and those who prefer to read Braille.Michael, you clearly have done well without relying on Braille, and I am not surprised there are others like you. Born profoundly deaf, I do speak and listen well, and did not learn sign language until I was 21. I worked extremely hard to be where I am in terms of spoken communication. Just as I worked very hard to learn to speak, I am sure that some blind people have to work just as hard as I did to be able to spell and write well, and it is easier for some to do so by learning Braille. This is not to say that every blind person has to learn Braille. I certainly did not need sign language in order to speak and listen well, but other deaf people I know do want sign language to aid in their educational development, and they have become successful in their lives as a result.You mentioned “many of us by our own choice.” I have no statistics or hard data, but it would be safe to assume that blind and visually-impaired people who are not successful in their careers, and do not use Braille, came into this situation through decisions made for them during their childhoods that may have something to do with not using Braille. Among the deaf and hard-of-hearing, and in other disability groups, some people have had choices made for them that in retrospect were ill-advised. For blind people who became successful, whether they rely on Braille or not, the choices they made have little to do with the points I make in my article.The other person who made a comment to my article says, and it bears repeating here: "I think the argument is that blind children need to be taught braille or they will have a strong potential to not be able to communicate in a written form effectively. Being able to write and spell is critical to getting a good job."
It is true that braille literacy has significantly decreased but that should not be equated with or somehow naturally imply that literacy or communicative skills of blind persons have diminished.
Nowhere in my article do I say that literacy has diminished, or that communicative skills have diminished. All I have written about is the ability of blind individuals to express themselves in the written word, either through Braille or without.
the fact that 90% of persons who use braille are employed should not be surprising. Since, given your own statistics, most of these adults have been of workforce age longer than those who do not learn braille, naturally they have had more of an opportunity to find stable, long-term, gainful employment. More generally, however, the fact that there is such a high unemployment rate among blind adults is, I believe, not attributable to their lack of braille usage. Rather, I believe that access to assistive technologies like screen readers and screen magnifiers in this information age significantly hinders opportunities in education, employment, and entertainment.
I cite these statistics in my article without further interpretation of the numbers. I lay out the numbers for people to digest, and have not offered further discussion on them other than to paint a fuller picture of the blind community. However, one sentence I wrote, “Employment statistics paint an even more powerful picture of how blind people live out their lives,” could have been more diplomatically worded.Can you elaborate further on what you mean about assistive technologies like screen readers and screen magnifiers, which “hinder opportunities?” How does this square with your achievements in utilizing those assistive technologies?
Also, since you are so interested in the differences among different groups of PWDS, consider that blind people still face a great deal of fear and ignorance in all walks of life. People still talk about me in the third person to my wife, still cower at my approach, and still speak to me as if I am deaf rather than blind. I do not believe that any other disability group faces more fear or ignorance on a regular basis and many (like your own) face much less. Finally, I find it a little odd that you, as a deaf person, would have so much to say about blindness and how best to cope with it. I would not think of making claims about the benefits of sign language for your community because I know so little about it and because signing is so foreign to me as a blind person. Regardless of the statistics you find so intriguing, perhaps you ought best to refrain from judging the quality of life of a group of persons so entirely different in their lifestyle and their everyday activities from your own.
It is presumptuous to say that the blind community “faces more fear or ignorance on a regular basis” than other disability groups, mine included. Each disability group has its own challenges in how it is perceived and labeled by the non-disabled population. There should not be, and never should be, any moral hierarchy among disability groups in terms of how they are negatively perceived by non-disabled people. It is enough to say that there should never be one single case of negative labeling or perception of any individual with a disability, ever.As you find it odd that I, “as a deaf person, would have so much to say about blindness and how best to cope with it,” I also find it odd that you take the moral road and say that blind people like you face more fear or ignorance than other disability groups, without knowing much about what other disability groups, including mine, face in their own worlds. Like Ana Rodarte, a woman featured on Oprah who has severe neurofibromatosis, a condition in which her face is so extremely disfigured that people scream and run away wherever she goes. Or a intelligent person in a wheelchair I met who has little control over the motor functions of his face and, as a result, drools into a cup – I have seen, to paraphrase your own words, “people talk in the third person about him, still cower at his approach, and speak of him as if he is deaf rather than mobility-impaired.” Or a child with dyslexia – people may think she is not intelligent and lacks attention, a perception that could do as much psychological damage to her self-esteem as someone who talks about a blind child in the third person and ignores him.No one should make a subjective moral determination that a group with a particular disability faces more fear or ignorance on a regular basis than another group with a different disability. We can make definitive moral determinations about individuals with disabilities based on their particular situation (i.e. a blind child in New Jersey was teased and made fun of by a group of boys, and then dragged and beaten up on the street, versus a child on a wheelchair in Texas who is just teased in the school halls but do not suffer physical abuse). But we should not make the same moral determinations about disability groups as a whole. Otherwise this invites labeling and stereotyping.Finally, in response to the comment that I “as a deaf person, would have so much to say about blindness and how best to cope with it,” where do I say in my article how blind people should cope with their own disability? I do not step on a soapbox and claim to be an expert on blindness, but instead try to draw on primary and secondary sources and comment as best I can on a disability I have no personal familiarity with. All the commentary in my article is based on information from different perspectives that are available on the web, including scientific articles, newspaper clippings, and the websites of the National Federation of the Blind (which according to the New York Times "frowns upon" reading print) and American Foundation for the Blind.Some blind and visually-impaired people, and their advocates, have written me to say it was a well-done article. Yet I do not seek perfection -- I always seek out opposing viewpoints in an effort to promote diversity, original thinking and honest critique. Thanks, Michael, for your insights and please feel free to comment anytime.
April Unemployment Rate for People with Disabilities: 15.2%
Earlier this week, I wrote here about the high U.S. unemployment rate among people with disabilities (PwDs) and spelled out some reasons -- obvious and not so obvious -- for the gap between this rate and the general U.S. unemployment rate.Today, the U.S. Department of Labor announced the unemployment rate for PwDs in April. The rate: 15.2%, a dramatic increase of 9% from the March rate of 13.9%. During the same period, the general U.S. unemployment rate rose from 9.7% to 9.9% -- a much slower rate of increase of 2%.Without access to specific data explaining the steep increase in the PwD unemployment rate versus the general population, I am refraining from making any conclusions on the disparity in the rate increases. However, it is safe to assume that the underlying basic causes behind higher unemployment among PwDs, which I wrote about in my original post, can play a major role in accelerating the rate of increase in the PwD unemployment rate.I am interested in hearing your thoughts on this.
Wanted: More People with Disabilities in the Workforce
Over the last three years, the Great Recession has been a major news topic in the United States, with the unemployment rate now running at nearly 10%. For people with disabilities (PwDs), unemployment has been a bigger story, with almost 14% of the PwD work force off the payrolls, according to March 2010 data compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.And a double whammy: while over 70% of the U.S. population is considered part of the labor force, the same data shows just 22% of the total PwD population participates in the labor force. With 27 million Americans classified as having a disability, this means that just over 5 million of them are employed. Ideally, even at the overall U.S. unemployment rate of 10%, 17 million PwD's, or 70% of the PwD population, should have a job. The 12 million missing PwDs, if they could actively search for, and ultimately land a job, could add 10% to the total U.S. work force -- not a small number when one is looking for potential sources of additional productivity and wealth.In reality, some of the PwDs are unable to hold a job for any reason due to their own specific disability, so the "12 million missing" figure is too optimistic. But there is no denying there are millions of PwDs relying on government subsidies, family support and other resources to get by, when they have specific skills, talents and expertise to perform satisfactorily in the work force when placed in the right role. Not to mention a unique outlook shaped by their almost daily efforts to resolve challenges which arise because of their specific disabilities. That they deal with adversity every day lends them the ability to work hard and develop creative solutions, which are two qualities essential to the success of any business.It is easy to scapegoat business as the reason for the relatively low employment of PwDs, because of the prevailing attitude among some employers that PwDs do not provide as much added value to a business as someone who is not disabled. This only tells part of the story. There are two other factors that contribute to underemployment of PwDs: a hiring process that is structured in a way that does not allow PwDs an equal platform upon which to market themselves for jobs; and an educational level among PwDs that is lower than that of the general population.
Make no mistake, I am a true believer in the free market. People -- disabled or not -- should succeed and sell themselves hard on their own merits without the expectation of external assistance from the government. They should put into practice the values of working hard, overcoming challenges, and developing their own skills and experience to ultimately become indispensable to any employer requiring these credentials. A favorite quotation of mine, "The world always wins," from Khaled Hosseini's Kite Runner, is not a fatalistic acceptance of your role in the whole wide world, but rather a Realpolitik appraisal of where you stand, and what you can do to make a major, but realistic, difference in your global community.This does not mean that businesses are exempt from addressing the issue of PwD underemployment. PwDs should compete on a fair, level playing field with those who are not disabled, so they can market their skills effectively and match themselves with employers who have a need for these skills. Yet, in reality, the prevailing myth that PwDs in the workforce cost too much and contribute little, a hiring process that limits access to PwD applicants, and the lack of educational opportunities for PwDs are three strikes against the ability of PwDs to be hired in the workplace, no matter how hard they work and how creative they are in getting themselves recognized.Within many business organizations, there is a reluctance to hire PwDs largely because of long-held myths that they cannot contribute as well as those without disabilities, and also because the cost of accommodating PwD's is thought to be prohibitively expensive. The current Think Beyond the Label campaign debunks these assumptions, and fortunately, more businesses and Fortune 500 companies are embracing the value of diversity in the workforce because it adds creativity, innovation and unique talent to their capabilities, providing them a critical competitive edge in a globalized world.Companies that incorporate diversity into their hiring strategies usually harbor work environments that are wonderfully diverse, very interesting to work in, and allow new ideas and solutions to incubate. This translates into greater awareness of the essential value of PwDs in the workforce, and enables companies to scour the entire labor pool for the talent and skills they need, instead of limiting themselves to the pool of people who are not disabled. When companies underutilize PwD candidates in their hiring practices, there is a tendency for these companies to be less aware of the work contribution value of PwDs, so they miss out on unique skills, talents, and traits that may be harder to find in the non-disabled talent pool.
The current hiring process contributes in a way to the above problem. For most companies, PwD job applicants share with non-PwD applicants the same process for applying for jobs, interviewing, and receiving job offers. That is an issue, because the (mostly online) process assumes you can see, hear, talk, and walk. Find a job you like online? Click on the "Apply Now" button. Fill out the information: your name, your address, your phone number, your employment history. (Can you do this when you're blind?) Get a phone call from a hiring manager, asking for a phone interview. (What if you're deaf?) Visit the company for an interview. (What if you're in a wheelchair, and the building is not accessible?) The very nature of access to the online sites weeds out PwDs who otherwise have excellent skills and talents that any company would kill for.While there is no denying that PwDs are just as talented as those who are not disabled, the educational system in the U.S. has not been uniform in its ability to provide opportunities for successful careers for PwDs. Partly because some PwDs students are not valued in the educational system, but more so because of disagreements on how best to educate PwDs, some disabled students go on to incredibly successful careers, while others are held back because the educational system has not afforded them the opportunity to unlock their talents and skills. This is a complex issue that merits an entirely new article focusing on education, but it is worth noting that if PwDs are evaluated on a case-by-case basis rather than within a set of assumptions, their skills and abilities can be more easily identified. Then, based on this information, they can be more effectively placed in the appropriate educational and professional tracks.I do not knock the business world, particularly those companies I have worked with. Compared to 30 years ago, businesses today have been far more progressive in hiring, interviewing, and employing PwDs. More Fortune 500's incorporate disability hiring in their diversity practices today than ever before. Yet, there are still many companies who, at best, are unaware of the potential value of PwDs for their businesses, representing a huge opportunity cost measured in lost productivity, missing wealth and, ultimately, a greater competitive edge.Feel free to share your thoughts. If you would like to share experiences and stories that highlight the issues above, please post them here or send me an email.
Think Beyond The Label...Not? (UPDATE: TV ads ARE Captioned & Campaign has followed up with CNN.)
UPDATE (4:15 pm ET): I have communicated with Barbara Otto at Health & Disability Advocates and she assured me that all of the "Think Beyond The Label" campaign's TV ads and other videos, including those on YouTube, are closed-captioned. She has communicated with CNN and all other media outlets to ensure that future airings of these advertisements are closed-captioned.@BeyondTheLabel posted these two messages on Twitter:
3:19 pm ET: "We are committed to making our website and tv spot accessible, and we indeed made sure our spots were CC. We're looking into CNN's issue."
3:36 pm ET: "We have contacted CNN and all our media outlets on the TV CC issue--please DM us if you see non-CC running anywhere else!"
For what it's worth, another "Think Beyond The Label" advertisement on CNN aired at 3:45 pm and it was still not closed-captioned.It appears to be a problem with CNN. Please disregard my original post.Kudos to Barbara Otto and the "Think Beyond The Label" campaign on being so quick to respond to this issue. It shows their commitment to ensuring that everyone in the community is informed of the campaign and in particular the importance of accessibility for people with disabilities to ensure that they are as productive as, if not more so, those without disabilities in the workplace.======================
UPDATE (3:00 pm ET): Barbara Otto of Health & Disability Advocates, which is leading the "Think Beyond The Label" campaign, has informed me that the TV commercial in question is indeed closed-captioned. She is following up with CNN to find out why it wasn't captioned.==========================ORIGINAL POST (2:00 pm ET): I wrote this article earlier this week about the Think Beyond The Label advertising campaign, a $4 million all-media venture aimed at educating companies about hiring people with disabilities. I was very pleased to see a campaign that used humor to dispel preconceived notions about the potential productivity of people with disabilities in the workplace.I was watching CNN this afternoon, as it started up its coverage of the advancing Snowmageddon of 2010, when it cut away to commercial. First up was a TV spot from Think Beyond The Label! Delighted, I settled in to watch the spot -- when it hit me. It is not captioned. Or closed-captioned, either. As a deaf person, I could not understand a word of what was being said. I sort of got the part at the 0:20 mark about being "coffee-impaired," as a professional woman in the spot, upon hearing something that was said, immediately spit out coffee. But that was pretty much it.For all the money they spent, and the effort they would have made in educating everyone about people with disabilities in the workplace, the people who ran the Think Beyond The Label campaign forgot the one fundamental fact: the accessibility of their very own TV commercials. This isn't thinking beyond the label.
That Resume Looks Fantastic! (Psst...She's Disabled.)
Last December, according to Disability Scoop, the unemployment rate for the U.S. was 9.5%. Among people with disabilities, the unemployment rate was 45 percent higher, at 13.8%.There are many possible and sometimes conflicting reasons for the 45% difference, but we can generally agree on a significant cause of this disparity: negative perceptions on the potential performance of people with disabilities in the workplace. It is an unfortunate fact of history -- we would all be living in a perfect world if everyone would be completely tolerant of people with disabilities. As the Afghani character Rahim Khan said to Amir in Khaled Hosseini’s novel Kite Runner, “In the end, the world always wins. That's just the way of things.” However, a subtle shift in perceptions makes a whole world of difference in improving tolerance toward this large and significant group.Someone thinks a blind person would not be able to lead guided tours in museums, a person with no arms cannot operate a forklift or other heavy machinery, or a person with Down syndrome cannot lead an independent lifestyle.Are these perceptions always true? The problem with these perceptions is that they are all negative-oriented – he can’t, she can’t, they can’t. It may be true in some, but not all, cases that each of these people cannot perform these functions. But that misses the point.When you think about someone you are hiring for your business, consider: Can she do it? Can he get this done? What can that person contribute that others cannot?Can a person with an extremely severe hearing loss be an expert in music? Yes. He was Ludwig von Beethoven. Can a person with one hand become a top pitcher in Major League Baseball, and finish third in Cy Young voting in 1991? Yes. He was Jim Abbott. Can a person with one leg finish a marathon in just over 3 hours? Of course! Amy Palmiero-Winters finished the 2006 Chicago Marathon with a time of 3:06. How did they achieve what they set out to do? Generally, those with disabilities who achieved their goals tended to show high levels of perseverance, originality and a determination to excel. Beethoven loved music, Abbott loved baseball, and Palmiero-Winters loved marathons (even ultra-marathons), so nothing was going to stop them. It was a matter of having the heart and energy to do what they loved. To have the passion to do what they enjoy, trumps any disability these people have.To address the issue of below-average workplace hiring of people with disabilities, an aggressive $4 million advertising campaign led by a coalition of states and non-profit organizations dedicated to people with disabilities was launched for the first half of 2010 in various U.S. media channels. Titled “Think Beyond the Label,” the campaign is running spots on television, in online and offline print, and National Public Radio to encourage businesses to consider employing people with disabilities. (Link to Abledbody.com story on the campaign.)“Think Beyond the Label” is not a typical staid, serious public service announcement. It is a witty take on the contributions that disabled people make to the workplace. A television commercial pokes fun at coffee-drinking-impaired colleagues, while eCards are sent to friends and family pointing to, among other things, a “pattern-impaired” woman who wears mismatched clothes. Generally, the goal of this campaign is to inform and educate businesses on the value people with disabilities bring to the workplace. In other words, people with disabilities, given the proper skillset and experience, bring as much value as anyone with that skillset would bring to a specific job, so it becomes a matter of evaluating each person on his or her merits and credentials.“Think Beyond the Label” tackles popular myths that pervade the employment process for people with disabilities. In this list of myths is one popular belief: that accommodations for people with disabilities are expensive. In fact, according to “Think Beyond the Label,” a large majority of accommodations costs less than $500, which is less than a week’s pay for a person on a $30,000 annual salary.One intangible that is not mentioned in this campaign, but which is a major part of a disabled person’s approach to life, is the value of being creative in a world that is stacked against people with a physical, mental or cognitive handicap. Having endured a lifetime or near-lifetime of living with a handicap in a “world that always wins,” a person with a disability almost always comes up with an innovative, original way to cope with the handicap and make every effort to lead a high quality of life, no matter how severe the disability.No one would dispute that there are two things that accurately describe a successful person with a disability, but which are not found in his or her resume: that this person has perseverance and a never-say-die attitude. Adapting to a disability, and coping in a world that is not always designed to accommodate this disability, takes a lot of effort and a lot of energy -- and the successful ones achieved what they set out to do because they loved their jobs and really wanted to make it work. Those are not bad qualities to have in any job.
So Who's Disabled?
Over the weekend, I came across an article in the Adventures in Modern Life blog by Ben Mattlin, a contributing editor at Institutional Investor. In it, he posts a letter from the mother of a 26-year-old woman with disabilities, expressing her offense at people who use inappropriate terms like "retarded" to describe people with disabilities. Here are a couple of excerpts from the mother's letter:
I'm privately offended by the widespread casual use of the word "retarded" as a synonym for "stupid." I hear this from people with physical disabilities as well as the able-bodied. I also wince a little whenever I hear a person with physical disabilities ranting about how people are confusing him/her with a person with cognitive disabilities just because he/she is in a wheelchair....
Going even further, it's my observation that some people with physical disabilities are prejudiced against OTHER people with physical disabilities. For example, some of my friends in wheelchairs won't consider romantic involvement with another person in a wheelchair. They see the other person's disability as an impediment, because they want their partner to be able-bodied.
What opened my eyes was Mattlin's comment to his own post:
One disability group that historically distanced itself from the rest of us is the deaf community. After all, they even have their own language! I used to wonder why my phone bill has a tax for the "deaf and disabled." Isn't that redundant? I thought.
I am deaf and have always considered myself disabled. I even write a blog that covers disability issues. I know many friends who are deaf who consider themselves part of the disabled spectrum, and also know some deaf people who do not consider themselves disabled. In a sense, deafness is an "invisible" disability, but it is a disability nevertheless.Now, when I consider myself disabled, I do not think of myself as not being able to function. I just view myself as not being able to use a part of my body that ordinarily would be used for many life activities. Initially, I was tempted to respond to Mattlin's comment by disputing his perception that the deaf community is trying to be separate from the rest of the disabled community. But after I spoke to my wife, and did some research on the web, I realized that this issue is already an open can of worms, and I cannot deny that there is a history behind Mattlin's comment.In Jamie Berke's blog About.com: Deafness, she posts this very question of how deaf people view themselves. Her title words were: "Deaf Culture - Deaf? Disabled? Both?" Apparently these questions elicited powerful responses within the deaf community, as people took every conceivable position to defend or dispute the contention that being deaf is being disabled.I am not going to go into every detail brought up in Berke's posts on this issue, because there are so many strands. However, I take serious exception to the attitude prevalent among some people within the disabilities community -- and in the technical term, I mean those who do not have effective use of a major physical, mental, or cognitive ability -- to try to consider themselves "not part" of the community. Those who do not know any other people with disabilities, and/or who are comfortable with their place in the world, are still considered part of the disabled community -- even if they do not have to take an active, physical part in this community. If they actively disown the disabilities community, perhaps out of a sense of self-consciousness, or a desire to prove themselves in the world, they are entitled to their own opinions. But they need to be sensitive to how this is perceived by others in this community, especially if they communicate their own feelings publicly.
For deaf people themselves, the fact that the disability is not physically obvious may lead some of them to not consider themselves disabled. This might stick in the craw of some people within the disabled community, considering that the population of people who are deaf or hard-of-hearing is very substantial and they have clout in politics and advocacy. I get Mattlin's point -- that the term "deaf and disabled" is redundant. I literally never thought about this contradiction until he pointed it out. Apparently, a Google search of the term "deaf and disabled" resulted in a surprisingly high number of instances of this term, both in formal names and in popular usage. Deaf and Disabled Telecommunications Program. Dogs for Deaf and Disabled Americans. On Idealist.org: "Working with deaf and disabled people."For a long time, I did not want to call myself deaf, and thus, disabled. I preferred the term "hearing-impaired." I thought it sounded less loaded and more professional, especially in the business world. I felt a bit strange coming into a business meeting or job interview, and calling myself "deaf." It was not out of any self-consciousness, or a desire to distance myself from the deaf community. At that time, I was aware that within the deaf community, the word "deaf" has so many loaded connotations. Whereas I technically considered "deaf" to simply mean someone with a hearing loss, other people used the word "deaf" to connote cultural identification (often using capital "D" instead of "d" -- in other words, "Deaf"). Even the sign for "deaf" describes both hearing loss and not using one's voice, while the sign for "hearing" does not describe the ear at all, but the mouth. (Click on this video and see the signs for "hearing" and "deaf", starting at 0:39.) I was particularly sensitive to these signs because I grew up working very hard to learn and perfect my speaking abilities even though I was born with very profound deafness (100 db in both ears). I did not want the world to think that the deaf community was all sign and no voice, considering the physical and mental investment I put into improving my speaking and listening abilities.It was all with good intentions, but there was a problem with this approach. Every time I used the word "hearing impaired," I consciously thought of my deafness. This body language was subtly apparent in my professional and social communications with hearing people, to the point that they viewed me first through a deaf lens and then through the "Michael" lens. If I wanted them to see me first as Michael, before defining me as anything else, I needed to change how I communicated myself. I found that if I called myself "deaf," instead of "hearing-impaired," it was easier and less complicated to say, and enabled me to focus on the topic at hand instead of stumbling over longer words. Moreover, trying to use the word "hearing-impaired" in the common spoken English vernacular was very awkward, and some deaf people I spoke to did not take this in a positive way because they felt I was slighting deaf culture and distancing myself from the deaf community, or even the disabilities community as a whole. No longer self-conscious, I do not care what people think of the term "deaf." I say it, usually with gusto, and then go on to the topic at hand.As a lifelong deaf person, I have a lot of admiration for the incredible diversity of deaf culture that has developed over many decades, along with the rich and varied history of American Sign Language and its international equivalents (British Sign Language, Indian Sign Language, etc.), and the oral and auditory-verbal traditions that also developed at the same time through the A.G. Bell Association and other related associations. I wish there were more politically correct signs for "deaf" and "hearing," but these signs are so deeply ingrained in communicative usage that I use them often without thinking about what they mean. I have many close friends in both the ASL and oral/auditory-verbal camps, and usually many of them are in both camps.So yes, I'm disabled. What's wrong with that?(Disclosure: I am an active member of the A.G. Bell Association.)