Hi Andrea, Shelley and all,
A good way to connect with disability activists and learn about disability
studies is of course through conferences and, for starters, listservs such
as DS-HUM and the Society for Disability Studies listserv. (I also highly
recommend Marilyn Wann's fat studies listserv on Yahoo and the new Fat
Studies Reader. Fat studies is linked to but not the same as disability
studies.) Shelley, I was wondering if it would make sense to post a
bibliography of disability studies and feminism and/or bioethics to this
listserv. And you have a special issue coming into print, yes?
OK, here's a short and somewhat random bibliography of some articles piled
next to my desk. I hope this is of interest to some.
cheers
rebecca garden
=============
Asch, Adreinne. Disability, Bioethics, and Human Rights. In The Handbook of
Disability Studies. Ed. Gary L. Albrecht, Katherine D. Seelman, and Michael
Bury (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2001): 297-326.
Feder Kittay, Eva. At the Margins of Moral Personhood. J of Bioethical
Inquiry 5(2-3) (June 2009): 137-156.
Garland-Thomson, Integrating Disability, Transforming Feminist Theory.
Disability Studies Reader, 2nd ed. Ed. Lennard J. Davis (NY: Routledge
2006): 257-273.
Holmes, M. Morgan. Mind the Gap: Intersex and (Re-productive) Spaces in
Disability Studies and Bioethics. J of Bioethical Inquiry 5(2-3) (June
2009): 169-181.
Kirschner KL, Brashler, R. Savage TA. Ashley X. Am. J. Phys. Med. Rehabil.
86(12):1023-1029.
Mollow, Anna. “When Black Women Start Going on Prozac*”: The Politics
of Race, Gender, and Emotional Distress in Meri Nana-Ama Danquah’s Willow
Weep for Me. Disability Studies Reader, 2nd ed. Ed. Lennard J. Davis (NY:
Routledge 2006): 283-299.
Price, Janet E. Engaging Disability. Feminist Theory 8(1): 77-89. (review
article)
Shildrick, Margrit. Deciding on Death: Conventions and Contestations in the
Context of Disability. J of Bioethical Inquiry 5(2-3) (June 2009): 209-219.
Tremain, Shelley. The Biopolitics of Bioethics and Disability. J of
Bioethical Inquiry 5(2-3) (June 2009): 101-106.
Wolbring, Gregor. Disabled People’s Approach to Bioethics. AJOB 1(3)
(Summer 2001).
Rebecca Garden, PhD
Assistant Professor
Bioethics & Humanities
Upstate Medical University
618 Irving Avenue
Syracuse, NY 13210
315-464-8451
>>> <[log in to unmask]> 11/11/09 4:00 PM >>>
Dear Shelley, thanks for reading about Matron Saints and for your input.
You are quite right to point out that people with other kinds of
disabilities are still subject to dehumanizing linguistic practices and I
will adjust
my comments somewhat on my website. I'm not convinced though about it
being counterproductive to make comparisons with other groups; as usually
when
people object to my comparisons they show a lack of appreciation for the
realities of survivors of incest. I am simply trying to get them to be
seen
as people with disabilities deserving real help, as opposed to just simply
hopelessly damaged dirty tramps. You say I have remained "at a distance
from our endeavours in disability studies." Well, I have not found the
disability studies community to be always so inclusive. I have had some
very
disappointing conversations with some philosophers of disability in which
they were very dismissive of psychological disabilities associated with
chronic trauma and did not see the interests of people with psychological
disabilities as tied to their own. Some people with physical disabilities
worry about their disabilities being seen as having a psychological
component
as they know psychological disabilities are generally taken less
seriously,
as being "all in the head." Two women in my group struggle with chronic
physical disabilities and they do not disclose to doctors and specialists
their histories of incest out of a reasonable fear of compromised care.
I
should ask other disability activists if they would be willing to be
members
or allies of Matron Saints--this would be a good opportunity for bridge
building; please consider this ~ an invitation to all disability activists
~.
Best, Andrea Nicki
_www.andreanicki.com_ (http://www.andreanicki.com)
In a message dated 11/11/2009 8:58:40 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:
Andrea,
while I am in solidarity with your activism for psychiatric survivors and
survivors of sexual trauma, I am afraid that I strongly disagree with your
remarks below and on your website according to which feminists do not use
"pejorative language" to refer to (other) disabled people or direct such
language at them. I could in fact cite at least three recent examples of
exactly this kind of derogation of "physically and cognitively disabled"
by
feminist bioethicists in feminist publications and in other public forums
(such as philosophy blogs).
But more importantly perhaps, it seems politically counterproductive and
divisive to attempt to argue for the claims to respect and recognition of
one
socially stigmatized group by pointing to (another) stigmatized and
vilified constituency (which remains disenfranchised and disadvantaged in
terms
of housing, education, employment, healthcare and every other major
component of contemporary social existence) and alleging that the latter
group is
no longer subjected to these sorts of humilating and dehumanizing
discursive
and linguistic practices. Indeed, that is a poor way to justify any
claims to entitlement.
The problem, as I see it, is that many feminists (including many, if not
most, feminist bioethicists) continue to be uninformed about the politics
of
disability (its actual character, causes, effects, and consequences) in
all of its variations and configurations. The disability studies community
is
inclusive -- theoretically, politically, and institutionally -- of the
sorts of issues that you are trying to give exposure to. Yet, your post
below, your remarks on your website, and previous posts you have made to
this
list indicate, to me at least, that you have remained at a distance from
our
endeavours, and that . Perhaps you need to engage in some critical
self-reflection about why this is the case. In any event, I don't think
your
current strategy is in any way ethically superior to the practice you
criticize
below.
Shelley Tremain
----- Original Message -----
From: [log in to unmask] (mailto:[log in to unmask])
To: [log in to unmask] (mailto:[log in to unmask])
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 11:08 PM
Subject: Re: IJFAB special issue CFP
This will be a very interesting issue! I would like to say however as a
feminist mental health activist that I think it is unethical to be
engaging
with the term "borderline personality disorder" though this is listed as a
possible topic for the issue:
Postmodernist challenges to gender informing feminist therapeutic
treatment for disorders such as Borderline Personality Disorder
I am one of the directors of an activist group in Vancouver--Matron Saints
of Incest Survivors--and one of our projects is help put an end to this
demeaning diagnosis which survivors of chronic sexual trauma in large
number
get diagnosed with. I have detailed my position on my website
_www.andreanicki.com_ (http://www.andreanicki.com/) , and argue, for one,
that we do
not continue to engage with perjorative language directed at people with
physical disabilities. We do not talk, for example, about "Feminist
Treatment
for Cripples."
Sincerely, Andrea Nicki
|
