According to Mullaly (2007), "Social justice, to neo-conservatives, is based on the belief in individual responsibility. That is, every individual has a responsibility to look after him or herself."(p.78). This view of personal responsibility negatively impacts citizens who do not have the necessary capabilities to look after themselves.Neoconservatives would argue that people with disabilities are the deserving poor, but without a voice these people are overlooked. This concept would allow for citizens who have been deemed unable, to access care and social assistance. Yet, as Mullaly(2007) explains "History has shown, however, that this group of of 'deserving poor' has always been numerically under-represented."(p.83).
Here is where the discrepancy of neo-conservatism and the "deserving poor" is obvious; these people are not represented properly and therefore are also not being provided for properly. We can see this issue being portrayed in the living standards of Manitobans with severe physical disabilities residing in institutionalized care. Though we are not living in a neo-conservative society, aspects of this philosophy are still impacting Manitobans with disabilities today. The standard of care provided in institionalized facilities is less than that prescribed by the Charter of Rights.
One of the first few lines I read while looking at the Charter of Rights states, "The Right of Choice". A person living in institutionalized care with a physical disability in Manitoba is more often then not required to have a roommate. This, however, is not a choice of the individual who is being placed into an environment with someone, whom in some cases they will spend most of their lives with. The facility chooses roommates based on efficiency of staff functions. Basically this means people are grouped together based on needs, in a way which is beneficial to medical and care providers. The absence of personal choice in this situation can greatly impact one's sleeping patterns, and even their happiness. Does it seem fair to be required to live with someone because it is convenient for someone other than yourself, regardless of how it might affect you?
Compared to the standard of living most Manitobans are accustomed to, people with physical disabilities in institutionalized living have much less privacy. Bathrooms are assigned to groups of people, and often times only a curtain is used for separation. Lack of privacy is already a constant struggle of individuals with disabilities who require assistance, and who now in institutions also have other clients surrounding them at personal times.
Lack of choice, lack of privacy, and lack of freedom are all challenges faced by those physically disabled. As Mullaly(2007) points out the neoconservative approach is very Darwinian. In this case the "stronger" people (those who instruct, supervise, and provide care) make the choices and the "weaker" people (those who have no option but to receive assistance) must comply.
The "deserving poor" are under represented because their voice is not often heard. If we as Manitobans believe in equality and human rights, we need to consider how this may not always be a fact in institutionalized care homes. The living conditions these individuals face, often times for their entire lives, does not meet the living conditions anyone would pick if a choice were given. So, why should people with severe physical disabilities be provided for with care that does not meet a standard of living we would feel comfortable with for ourselves?
-Eliza R.
I think you raise a very good point! Many of the people making social policies don't often stop to consider how much of an impact it will have on the personal lives of those with a physical disability. And it becomes a violation to ignore the basic human rights of those who the neoconservatives label "deserving poor". If Manitoba is going to be the home of the Canadian Museum for Human Rights, then we should probably set a better example.
ReplyDelete-Erin Roche
I do agree with you when you questioned the fairness of those who are placed in institutionalized facilities are not given a choice in regards to a roommate. Why does it seem that these rules and policies are put in place by those people that do not have family members, or any acquaintances with a physical disability?
ReplyDeleteThe policies in place only seem to fit a certain group of people and there are always those who are ignored or left out. It is every individuals' right to acquire and have access to resources, but it seems that there is always someone who is left out or may feel ignored.
Those that are affected and / or neglected need to have a voice to speak for them, to attract the attention of that one person who will make that difference.
Dana W
Hello Eliza, your blog really opened my eyes to the poor conditions of people with physical disabilities in institutionalized living. I didn’t realize how much lack of choice was give in these institutions. I agree that the deserving poor are underrepresented because of their voices not being heard and the lack of knowledge in our societies. We need to educate ourselves as social workers to know what issues people with disabilities are facing and advocate for change. Thanks for the insightful post!
ReplyDeleteNicole G
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThank you all for the comments in response to my earlier post. After I read your comments I re-read my post, and discovered something else I thought was worth mentioning. Though it is within these care homes and institutions that people with physical disabilities often have few rights, the alternative situation is often scarier. What if conditions were worse, or institutions were non- existant? It isn't necessarily the fault of the facility for providing care that does not match up to a specific standard, because they do not always have enough funding or space to do so. Like you said Nicole, we as social workers need to advocate for this change. Not only do we need to provide a voice for these people; these insitutions are obviously lacking in the neccesary resources and funding to provide an improved standard of living. It is essential we educate ourselves as well as these facilities so that we can determine the means we must gain in order to make these changes!
ReplyDelete-Eliza R.
Hi Eliza, it was sad to read that a person living in institutionalized care with a physical disability in Manitoba is more often required to live with a roomate that is chosen for them. They basically have their rights and privacy stripped from them. It is sad to see that they can't choose someone because they may have common interests or get along well but how they are grouped together based on their needs. I work in a group home with physically and mentally disabled people and the number one focus is on the person's choices. We help them to make informed choices but at the end of the day, they decide what activity they would like to do, what to eat/drink or what to watch on tv. Choice can be seen as a top priority for quality of life for a severely or moderately disabled person.
ReplyDeleteTiffany