GlobalSouth Disability Studies

Announcement: 1st South Asian Interdisciplinary Critical Disability Studies Conference - organising group formed

2009-05-07T13:25:00.002+10:00

A 1st South Asian Interdisciplinary Critical Disability Studies Conference is proposed for 19 – 21 April 2011. (Week before Easter).

Undecided is the country location in South Asia. A closed Facebook planning group has been established to discuss locations, format, funding and organisation of the conference. If you wish to join this group the link is below:

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=109414238664&ref=nf

Alternatively if you interested in broader South Asian Disability Studies concerns there is an existing OPEN facebook group: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2397949068&ref=mf

Disability and Economy: Creating a Society for All: Todai Forum 2009 in UK

2009-05-07T06:22:00.001+10:00

Disability and Economy: Creating a Society for All

Hosted by Research on Economy and Disability (READ), the University of Tokyo (Todai)

In association with Manchester Metropolitan University (MMU)

PROGRAMME on TODAI FORUM 2009 by READ-TODAI & MMU

I. Objectives

Our theme, one of the three themes of the Todai Forum 2009 (Former name: UT Forum 2009), is “Economy and Disability: Creating a Society for all”. Until recently, the problems of disability such as disability-based-discrimination, social inequality and human rights abuse were trivial in mainstream society around the world. Now we are recognizing that impairment “is a natural part of the human experience” (U.S. Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 701(a)), and that “disability results from the interaction between persons with impairments and attitudinal and environmental barriers that hinders their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others” (U.N. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities of 2006, Preamble (e)). In this sense, it is necessary to tackle the disability issues as the important social, economical and political agenda in order to create a more comfortable society for all of us to live in. Disability problems are without doubt a primary topic for human existence and all mankind.

Traditionally social science researches in disability field have been limited to social welfare or criminal law. It is the emergence of the disability studies in the United Kingdom that was the turning point which changed the approach of the traditional social science researches. Disability studies, to which political science and sociology etc. have contributed is a new area of multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary academic study. According to "the social model of disability" in the British disability studies which emerged in 1970s, the difference between impairment which is an attribute of individuals (intrinsic biological characteristics) and “disability” which is a socially created and constructed problem is significant. Persons with actual or perceived impairments become “disabled persons” by society's failure to accommodate their needs. Disability studies have had a great impact around the world including Japan.

Recognizing, emphasizing and reaffirming the huge contribution by disability studies, we should further explore and develop new approaches, on the basis of the studies, to measuring how our society interacts with "disable persons" in order to elucidate the very complex problems of disability caused by various barriers. One of such approaches is the "Disability and Economics". Economics has developed tools to study customs and institutions as endogenous outcomes of economies. Economists investigate human behavior, shedding light on incentives and their interdependence. In particular, game theory is useful for this purpose. With these theoretical methods we can examine and analyze the issues relating to disability as endogenous institutions. Furthermore, by solving incentives of individuals, we investigate effective policies for “disabled persons”. As an analytical tool the economic viewpoint is indispensable and essential for assessing and analyzing disabling factors and providing a new perspective to create a more inclusive and decent society for all .

In disability studies, economic perspective is being ignored even at today. Now, it is the time for disability studies to utilize the framework and knowledge of modern economics, especially in the fields such as income security, anti- discrimination and disability employment policies. Our theme of the Todai Forum 2009 focuses on the results of research, conducted in the READ Project (“A study on disability in a socio-economic context: toward a unified social science”) of the Graduate School of Economics at the University of Tokyo (http://www.read-tu.jp/english/). The Project is to develop a new field of social science focusing on various barriers in socio-economic contexts by introducing economics into disability studies. In order to present to the world this new multidisciplinary approach and some added values by it and promote international exchange between researchers and students, our Forum is held at the birthplace of disability studies, the United Kingdom on April 29 (Wednesday) and 30 (Thursday), 2009.

Mored details and the programme see: http://www.read-tu.jp/english/Forum2009/program.html

Disability Studies as homosocial?

2009-04-27T06:28:00.005+10:00

I remember critical legal studies scholar Prof. Margaret Thorton discussing homosociality, the notion that people were attracted to their own kind. Of course she was refering to ways that women were excluded from significant positions in law. I was thinking about this recently and how it may apply to different trajectories of disability studies. We often find that in the main, U.S., authors mainly cite from the pool of other U.S., scholars (and certain ones at that) and may dip outside into U.K. scholars. Similarly, U.K. scholars only seem congnisant of a particular frame. Of course I am making a generalisation, but I think my broad brush on this is fairly accurate. I'm often told that people cannot access materials from 'elsewhere'. 'Elsewhere' is a interesting place! Yes, sometimes obscure journals don't make the internation trail. But I am not convinced. As a global south scholar I am alway always obliged to engage in the perenial task of getting my head around all the literature in a specific area. Isn't that what we encourage our students to do? The reference point/benchmark is the USA/UK. The journal refereeing almost promotes this hegemony by insisting on certain citations. Imagine doing D/S research without mentioning C.B., T.S., R.T., D.M - to name a few.

When I was in Sri Lanka I worked with academics to get their work published in local languages and also in international journals in English. We may ask if we are truly global - are we prepared to search out work from the antipodes, to make that effort? So here's the challenge. There is really good stuff coming from the global south, in particular NZ and OZ - some work is more known than some. I am not mentioning other countries because I am not as familar with the work. Hence I have asked 'friends' of mine in Japan and other places to be contributors on this blog. Our early career researchers are doing exciting stuff. Most people are working in isolation. Here's my suggestion and I've made it be before. Let's us start a global south D/S research clearinghouse with a thematic database of global south authors. This will highlight stuff that maybe new to us and promote different perspective and assist in drawing from a greater pool of work. Such a clearhouse may facilitate interesting research partnerships. What do you think? Any takers to get this going? Maybe it could be commenced as a student project?

Becoming Citizens: The Historical Construction of Intellectual Disability

2009-04-24T10:26:00.000+10:00

Griffith Abilities Research Program

in partnership withThe Disability Studies Research Concentration,School of Human Services and SocialWork

is pleased to invite you to a public workshop

Becoming Citizens: The Historical Construction of Intellectual Disability

at 9am to 4.30pm on Thursday14^th May 2009

Venue: TBA (Brisbane area)

This public workshop is aimed at people with disabilities, families, professionals and interested others and will provide an accessible history of intellectual disability, tracing key themes in the popular discourse, policy, and services history and their impact on the lives of individuals and families.

Please register your interest in attending by contacting:

Natalie Clements 07 3382 1134 N.Clements@gu.edu.au

Speakers:

Christopher Goodey is currently Assistant Director of the Centre for Studies on Inclusive Education. He has collaborated with the UK Health Commission and representatives of people labelled with intellectual disabilities to desegregate institutions and government services. Christopher has published on the history of intellectual disability in leading journals across a wide range of disciplines.

Tim Stainton is Professor of Disability Policy, Practice and Theory at the University of British Columbia and currently the Sir Allan Sewell Visiting Professor at the School of Human Services and Social Work, Griffith University. He has published widely on the history of intellectual disability, and is currently completing a manuscript for Palgrave Macmillan on the historical construction of intellectual disability.

Lynn Rose has been at Truman State University in Kirksville, Missouri, since 1995. Dr. Rose's specialties are ancient history and disability studies. Along with several articles, chapters, and encyclopedia entries, she has published one book, The Staff of Oedipus: Transforming Disability in Ancient Greece (2003). She was awarded a Mary E. Switzer Distinguished Fellowship for 2003-2004 to support her research project on intellectual disability in ancient Greece. She spent the year with the Institute for Greek and Latin Language and Literature at the University of Halle-Wittenberg.

Patrick McDonagh teaches in the Department of English at Concordia University, Montreal, Canada. His research explores the relationship between cultural representations, philosophical and medical notions of intelligence and its lack, and social policies related to people identified as having intellectual disabilities. Most recently, he is the author of Idiocy: A Cultural History (Liverpool UP, 2008). He is currently working on two major projects: the first is an annotated collection of new translations of historical documents relating to the wild boy of Aveyron, which would include writings by Philippe Pinel, Joseph-Marie de Gérando and Jean Itard; the second is a popular history tracking the growth and permutations of the idea of intelligence.

Lee-Ann Monk is a research associate at the University of Melbourne, working on an Australian Research Council (ARC) funded project on the history of psychiatric institutionalisation and community care in Australia 1830s – 1990s. Her research interests include the history of mental health and intellectual disability and the social and cultural history of work in nineteenth and twentieth century Australia. In 2005, she was awarded an ARC Postdoctoral Fellowship (Industry), to research and write the history of Kew Cottages. She is currently completing a history of the Cottages from their establishment in 1887 as Australia’s first specialised institution for people with intellectual disability to their recent closure. Her history of nineteenth-century ‘lunatic’ asylum attendants Attending Madness: At Work in the Australian Colonial Asylum was published in 2008 as a volume in Clio Medica: The Wellcome Series in the History of Medicine.

Chair: Professor Lesley Chenoweth

What are the parameters of doing disability studies from a global south perspective?

2009-04-24T08:38:00.001+10:00

Mmm. Okay this is a hard one! The question appears to be easy. So I'll have a go and no doubt will continue a blog around the topic in response to YOUR comments. We could ask whether there is such a differentiation - global south - given that much of our knowledge based comes from the First nations (the global north). Yet I don't think some of us uncritically transpose this knowledge to home turf and practices. There is adaptation ... an intermingling with local conditions and nuances, e.g. how the politics and race and diversity operate at the local level. To be honest I think also the climate of intellectual and research development has more space to flow - away from some of the pressures inherent to intellectual communities where there is a critical mass. [translate: the field is not as incestious or cliquey, or dogmatic]. Of course we have our own divisions in Oz and no doubt the same is in NZ ... but there are less of us .. and there is a distance to do our own thing! My own background brings in issues around empire and postcolonial realities as well. I'll stop here for the moment and work on this some more later.