Entitlement or insensitivity??

Veteran Denied Access to Amusement Park
Amusement Park Enforces Policy

This is an interesting story. It seems that the heart of the issue is whether or not the family was demonstrating entitlement (expecting that the park should let Hoffman enter the park without paying) or the park was being insensitive by having rules that they were unwilling to bend.

I don't want to get too bogged down in who was right or wrong in this story because I wasn't there and I don't know all the details. All I know is what was reported in the media and that is simply not enough to make a judgment from. I think that the larger issue that is in play here is how to handle people with disabilities who create situations that were before unencountered or unanticipated (e.g. paralyzed marine arrives at the park and will not be admitted).

In looking at a situation as presented in this news story, I would like to think that an agreement could have been made, but think about this---how many times has a "disability" been abused? Case in point...at a previous university where I spent time, athletes would be provided with handicap hang tags when they were injured. These tags allowed injured athletes the opportunity to obtain priority parking due to their medical condition. When used correctly, I have minimal issues with this; however, when I watched athletes with handicap tags park in a handicap spot, JUMP from their cars, RUN into the building so they are not late for class, my mind innocently wonders whether or not they truly need the advantage that is legally provided for people with disabilities. (Please note the sarcasm here. In these cases, I immediately called parking services and told the students' adviser because of this flagrant abuse.) Likewise I have met individuals who need wheelchairs for mobility who refuse to park in handicap parking spaces because those spaces are for "people with disabilities."

As I look at this story, I found myself quickly frustrated with the park, but then I thought more about it and found myself thinking about the family. I don't know the family and I don't know the situation, but I do wonder about the concept of entitlement (you OWE this to me). I don't know about anyone else, but when someone tells me that I owe them something, it makes me start to wonder and kind of puts me in a bad mood (I'm not saying this is right, I'm just saying...). Whether you have a disability or not, acting entitled to services or experiences is just bad business. It makes people unhappy and less likely to work with you. Of course this is very easy for me to say when I am sitting in the comfort of an office without any real life situation pressing on me.

I guess the moral of the story is that we need to be more thoughtful and considerate. The amusement park could have handled the situation differently and the family could have handled the situation differently. Having policies that have some "wiggle room" or having hired staff that are allowed to use their judgment in situations can prevent situations like this. However, being understanding of organizational structure and established rules and guidelines and recognizing the larger implications of a "one-time" decision will also help prevent situations like this.

The moral of the story...think twice before you park in that handicap spot if you don't need it :)

One final thought...the two headlines that I developed for the story link offer insight into how media can bias the reader SO easily!

Mentally Disabled Teen Gets 100 Years in Prison in Child Sex Abuse Case - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com

I'm not real sure what to think about this case. It tears me up for many reasons. As a father of a two-year-old daughter I can't imagine the complete and total anguish I would experience if my daughter were the younger child in the case. Even writing about this is making me extremely uncomfortable and distraught.

That said, in this case it does sound like there are two victims--the child and Aaron. As a parent it is hard to separate justice from revenge. When our children are wronged we say we want justice but in many cases I think revenge may be a better description.

My question is this...should Aaron be shown leniency because of his cognitive status? As a side note, the correct terminology is teen with a cognitive disability NOT mentally disabled teen. Fox News and all the other news stations need to pay attention to this.

I am not a lawyer and I certainly don't know all the facts in this particular case, but what should be done? What is just? What is right? Can justice and rightness be one and the same in this case? I don't know.

Mentally Disabled Teen Gets 100 Years in Prison in Child Sex Abuse Case - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com

Posted using ShareThis

Completely Off Topic

Okay I was thinking today....I know a dangerous beginning to any blog entry...that technology has really slowed our world down. I know that this may sound counter intuitive, but think about for a minute...it may have made aspects of life easier, but there are a lot of things that are more difficult and convoluted.

For example, I used to have voice mail. I would go into my office, pick up my phone and see if I had any messages. At home, I would press a button and listen to the messages on my answering machine. This was way back way in 1997. Now I check my voice mail in my office, my voice mail on my phone, my email, my Facebook account, and my Twitter account. See, technology has slowed us (me) down.

Even this blog is a great example of technology making me less productive. The time I am spending writing this could be spent writing an article, preparing a lecture, reading for the next semester and so on.

Don't get me wrong, I love technology (my wife calls me her Geek and I trust that she means it lovingly!) and I love my gadgets. This is one reason why I bought the iphone. Before the iphone, I had a cell phone, GPS, mp3 player, and a radio. Now all I need is my phone. It does all of these things.

Someone needs to figure out a way for technology to make us more productive. For the love of everything, can we have one place to check our mail (voice, e, and snail), update our statuses, and communicate with those far and wide??

I'd like a computer chip installed in my brain please...but only when everyone else has one so we can all communicate and be productive without ever leaving our homes :)

Way Too Long

Okay it's been way too long since my last post and I can only say that I have been lazy. Plenty of interesting things have been happening, but I just haven't taken the time to address them on my blog. Let's start with something that is fitting for this blog...disability awareness.

Way back in the fall I had a class of students spend 4 hours in a wheelchair on the campus of Georgia Southern University. There insights and experiences were amazing! In addition, I spent the better part of a day in a wheelchair myself. I taught my classes and went everywhere that I needed to. By the end of the day, I was physically and emotionally exhausted. My hands had massive blisters, my shoulders were sore and perhaps worst of all, my pride was in tatters.

I must have looked particularly pitiful trying to maneuver around campus because several people came to my rescue to help me up some hills. As someone who likes to be very independent, this was very difficult to say the least! I learned several things through this experience.

First, GSU does NOT have a wheelchair friendly campus. The beautiful brick sidewalks are terrible to roll on and there are numerous sidewalks that lead to nowhere. There were several times when I just ran out of sidewalk and had to turn around and go back the way I came. Also, some of the sidewalks are too narrow. If I was on the sidewalk, everyone else had to get off the sidewalk. If I were with friends, they would have had to walk in the grass.

Second, wheeling through parking lots is amazingly unsafe. When sidewalks disappeared, I took my life into my hands and tried to roll through parking lots. I can't see the drivers and because I am not in their normal sight lines, drivers can't see me. It was literally a terrifying experience.

Third, people are friendly and want to help....for the most part. I think that because we don't interact with people in wheelchairs on a regular basis, we don't know what to do or say. People did hold doors and offer assistance which was great, but people definitely were uncomfortable around me and unsure of how to act.

Fourth, I had an entertaining/sad moment. I went to visit a faculty member in another building. This building was a temporary building but the University had added a very manageable ramp leading up to the front entrance. However, when I did reach the front entrance I realized there was a step into the building. I tried for about 10 minutes to "jump" the step. I tried going backward, I tried going forward, I tried holding the door frame and pulling myself up and over, but nothing worked. I finally had to admit defeat and step out of the chair to pull myself in the door.

Finally, I learned that I am tremendously blessed. It is not that I couldn't traverse the campus in a wheelchair; however, it is significantly more difficult to do it in a wheelchair. Remember your abilities and be thankful for them. Don't feel sorry for people in wheelchairs, be active in finding ways to make their transportation easier.

The R-Word

It's been too long since my last post and for that I am sorry. There has been much occurring in society around me that needs to be discussed. I am not going to try and catch up on everything today, but I wanted to share with all of you the Eliminate the "R-Word" Campaign. Please take the time to see what this great issue is all about. Keep on the lookout for my thoughts about the Olympics and the Paralympics.

So You Think You Can Dance II

As promised, the much awaited response :) to my last post about Brett Banford's appearance on So You Think You Can Dance... I feel that I am of two minds in relation to this story. First, when they introduced Brett I was concerned with how they would treat his story. Would he have talent and show dancing skills, or would he be one of the "15 seconds of fame" people who look utterly ridiculous and only audition so they can have their mugs on TV? Thankfully, he was the former (in my opinion). He had dancing skills and this was recognized by the judges. The judges went on to say that while he could "move well" he was not a good dancer. They mentioned how they were inspired by him and the other dancers in the auditorium were applauding Brett's efforts and his comments. I was very grateful that the judges handled the situation in the manner that they did. They did not patronize Brett and they never said that he was a good dancer, for a person with a disability. (A statement like this may have pushed me over the edge and caused me to throw something!) Overall, my initial fears were unfounded and I feel that the story was handled well.

Now...here is the other thought that I was having. In today's society we talk about equality and how we would like to see everyone treated equally (while we know this will never be reality and in some cases should not be reality). My question is this--was Brett treated equally or did he receive "special" treatment because of his disability? If we want people with disabilities to be treated like everyone else, does that mean that we should embrace the good and the bad of that idea? If Brett had not had a disability, would he have been treated differently than he was? While it is impossible to answer this question, we can look at some of the behaviors of the judges. Why did the judge feel it necessary to begin his comments by asking "you don't want me to patronize you do you?" Did he ask that question of any other participant in the competition or did Brett receive different treatment? Also (and I may be reading way too much into this and trying to judge intent), didn't the tone of the first judge's voice sound slightly condescending? It almost sounded to me as if he was speaking to a child rather than a young man. This may be completely incorrect, but watch the clip and decide for yourself.

For me, I guess the point is this...on a show like this (an extremely important qualifying statement) was Brett treated differently because of his disability? Should he have been treated differently because of his disability? On a show that boosts its ratings because judges abuse or degrade participants, was an exception made because of Brett's disability? I would suggest that Brett was treated differently because of his disability. I think that if he had not had a disability, then he would have been treated more harshly, not necessarily badgered and belittled, but more harshly than he was. (I realize that this completely ignores the issue of treating people like this in the first place, but this is how these shows get their ratings and I am only making this argument in the context of the show.)

On a much more practical level, the question becomes, "how should we treat people with disabilities?" Typical answers to this usually include some form of the word "dignity." I would certainly agree with that, but I would also like to add that we should treat people with disabilities similarly to the way we treat other people. Or maybe, on a much more positive note, we should start treating everyone else like we feel we should treat people with disabilities. Don't offer pity, offer acceptance.

So You Think You Can Dance

Now personally, I know that I can not dance to save my life, but this is not about me, it's about a young man named Brett Banford. Last week on the show, So You Think You Can Dance, Brett danced for all to see on national television. When his story began on the show, I got very nervous. You see, Brett has Downs Syndrome and I was very worried with how his story would be told and how he would be treated. Take a look at the video and see for yourself. I will offer some thoughts later.