walking . is . overrated

7 responses so far ↓

• 1 The water dragon // Oct 16, 2007 at 5:17 pm

  But, but but… the government doesn’t actually say at all, we do.
  Maybe you can cast your mind back to last year’s census that you filled in, probably with a lot of grumbles about them asking all this darned stuff. You will have chosen your reply to a couple of questions about disability (you aren’t the guy who burned his paper and then got convicted are you?).
  Well out of the people who said yes, Statistics NZ made a random selection of people to ask a whole heap more questions about disability.
  The people who answered chose their answers freely, and the people asking the questions didn’t have thumbscrews, forcing their ‘quarry’ to say “yes I have a disability”, “no I haven’t” according to the deep dark plot that was hatched by a government department.
  The answerers have, in fact, been answering questions just as they chose for 3 censuses now. Actually in 2001, the proportion of those 65 and over saying they had a disability was over 50%. So if, as you imply it’s a deep dark conspiracy (to do what, one wonders) I think it may have gone pear shaped.
  Let’s leave polite government-speak behind, ’cause I think that’s part of what put the wind into your righteous wrath.
  As the population ages, there are more people with impairments and people get more than one impairment. The statistician was trying to be polite and point out that as we get older more bits wear out and more of us, so the percentage of disability gets higher as we get older. (I’m working on my fifth impairment as we speak, so that I’ll be well over the odds by the time I get to 65).
  What I have difficulty working out is why this pretty self-evident truth causes you so much grief. It’s a problem if you believe the myths that being impaired (or if it comes to that, disabled) is a lesser-than status as that’s disturbingly inaccurate.
  I’d recommend some serious attention to the NZ Disability Strategy that says “Disability is not something individuals have. What individuals have are impairments. Disability is the process that happens when one group of people create barriers by designing a world only for their way of living…” There’s much more to life than as a crip than getting upset or irritated about being called disabled because that implies you’re inferior. Get in and do something about the barriers and discrimination, for heaven’s sake

• 2 Red // Oct 16, 2007 at 7:02 pm

  Hi, and thanks for your comment -

  I’m certainly not, as you say, “getting upset about being called disabled”, in fact my post implied nothing of the sort, I was merely commenting on the makeup of that 600,000+, and contemplating what percentage of that are elderly people with age-related limited mobility. By definition, does that make all elderly people with some mobility limitation disabled?

  I personally have never considered elderly people as part of the disability stratosphere, and perhaps that’s a viewpoint I need to reconsider. However, I hold this view because I do very much look at disability from a social perspective, and I believe elderly people, impaired by nature’s natural course, don’t have the same passion for empowerment and independence that many of us who have grown up with a disability - or impairment - have. So when someone talks about the ‘disability community, all 600,000+ of them’ - how much of that group are people focussed on disability awareness and disability rights, and how many of those are elderly people with, say, arthritis?

  Further, I hardly think it’s fair to say “Get in and do something” when you have no idea of my background in disability awareness; something I feel very strongly about and have made large contributions towards - and still do, in fact. Nor do I have “righteous wrath”! Gosh. Anyway, I do appreciate the feedback and value your comments, let’s just not get too carried away and blow my comments out of proportion.

  Cheers - Red.

• 3 The water dragon // Oct 17, 2007 at 12:11 pm

  Hello Red,
  I would certainly encourage you to think further about it. Te ao disability always has been largely comprised of people who don’t have their impairments from birth. Point is it doesn’t matter really. An impairment is an impairment is an impairment. And it’s because of impairment that we experience disability discrimination.
  You aren’t better or worse if you get a spinal cord injury on a motor bike at 17 than if you do it at 55, and whether you acquire hearing loss from illness at 60 or measles before birth, there’s still an impairment, and still disability discrimination.
  Yes there’s a different experience of impairment for adults acquiring impairments and those who have them from birth but there are different experiences too depending on a whole pile of factors. If you’re female, or Maori or gay or poor, there’s different experience again.
  The census has got a whole pile of interesting facts that tend to set our beliefs on our heads. For example that of disabled people in work, the group most represented are people whose impairment has been present since birth. Older disabled people are, by comparison having a much tougher journey. One could say that means having a from-birth impairments means a sweeter deal. But you and I know that’s only half the picture, and education, for example will have been much more difficult. Older disabled people have the same kind of better-picture-here, worse-picture-there thing. Point is, evidence can be useful, because it means you(me) guess and suppose less
  Red those older disabled people acquiring impairments are just like younger disabled people in having some who live a privileged life and don’t give a toss, and some who realise what the impairment means and get out to join a human rights campaign for disability rights, or protect laws that say you have to have access. (and yes I am talking about people I know) Some of those oldies you say don’t have passion have got heaps of it. And remember someday you (all of us) will be old.
  Will you suddenly miraculously not be disabled? Will you finally be able to say yes to all those asinine questions from various entities that ask if you are still disabled?
  The main point I was making was that the evidence in the census and how the census was done doesn’t really match with your suppositions. I was also pointing out that social models of disability don’t have an age limit on them, and that every single one of us, however we may become impaired experiences disability. Who am I or you or any of us to say our experience is more important?

• 4 Blair Campbell // Oct 17, 2007 at 8:02 pm

  Question: Is there a law that cover’s ramp’s and how steep they should be in places like club’s etc.

• 5 Jan // Oct 17, 2007 at 10:45 pm

  EEEK its the “oldie” again. I have been on my “high horse” in the category of “do we need a disabled awareness week” and now came to read this category. Really - all viewpoints above are correct. Living with my husband - quadriplegic since 1972 - we always have had ramps. Now its me who had the arthritis and just had artificial hip. Somehow I don`t class myself as in the same “disabled” category as my husband - why I really can`t say - apart from my is an age problem and not something I have had to experience for years - however I sure appreciate our ramps now!!! These artificial hips take a bit of getting used to
  Blair; I am not too sure if there is a law about ramps; but I can tell you the recommendation used to be 1 in 12. Alot of organisations do not go to the “horse`s mouth” so to speak; a disabled person; for advice and gaily put in real steep ramps; heavy doors etc. and believe they have made their building accessible.

• 6 John // Oct 26, 2007 at 3:34 pm

  Hello, I am a Barrier Free Auditor and yes there are regulations. There has been a law since 1985, that does stipulate ramps should comply with the building code and this states that the gradient should 1 in 12 (steepest it can be).
  If you want to find a barrier free auditor in your local area have a look on the barrier free website.
  Hope this answers your question.

• 7 barbz // Oct 26, 2007 at 6:31 pm

  Kia ora John,

  I am going to Wellington on business and staying at the Copthorne Towers, this will be the first time that I have travelled with my powerchair. I had no issue with the hotel on my previous visits and the 2 disability rooms are fine except for little things like having the shower head right at the top and towels on top of shelves that are high up.

  This time the agent booking the accommodation mentioned the powerchair and they said it wasn’t a suitable hotel for people in wheelchairs because the ramp is too steep and the easy access closes at 9pm. This hotel must have been built after 85. Another interesting place I stayed in Wellington was Quest on the Terrace. ( I didn’t do the booking) I arrived with my walking frame to find stairs to the elevator. And bless the dear heart, they had up graded me to the penthouse suite and the bedroom was up a flight of stairs. All the other rooms had step down lounges, fortunately I was able to swap places with collague and found one with a room where the bathroom and the bedroom were on the same level. They were apartments so I suspect they are exempt.

  IS there anywhere that we can complain to when we find these anomalies.

  This hotel is

Leave a Comment