Perceptions of Our Childhood: Confronting Social Constructions of Care, Disability, and Childhood

The Sociology of Childhood and Youth Studies in Canada is finally out! 

This is a great edited collection exploring Canadian scholarship about young lives from a sociological perspective. 

I'm honoured to have a chapter in this collection examining our own experiences around disability and sibling relationships titled Perceptions of Our Childhood: Confronting Social Constructions of Care, Disability, and Childhood. Most importantly, I'm thrilled to have had the opportunity to expand on aspects of my doctoral research that push back against negative notions about disability and childhood. 

Strategies for Competent and Ethical Disability Law Advocacy

Wednesday, November 30, 2016 from 12:00 PM to 1:30 PM (EST) is the 2nd annual Council of Canadians with Disabilities (CCD) Conference Fundraiser. 

Please join myself, and others, as we discuss issues related to disability advocacy and the law. 

Ottawa Book Launch! Disability Politics in a Global Economy: Essays in Honour of Marta Russell

Please join us Thursday October 20th from 4 to 6 PM at the University of Ottawa (Fauteux Hall, FTX570) for the launch of Disability Politics in a Global Economy. 

Please RSVP: HRREC@uOttawa.ca

Public Consultations on the future of the Huronia Regional Centre

From now until September 20, 2016 we have the opportunity to share feedback on what the province of Ontario should do with the 175 acres of land that were once the Huronia Regional Centre. 

Ontario officially closed the last of its institutions for individuals with intellectual disabilities in 2009. Since this time, the province has quietly rid itself of many of these sites. 

For example, all 354 acres of Rideau Regional Centre (in Smiths Falls) were sold through the Ontario Realty Corporation in 2011 for $100,000. With the private buyer planning to build a residential seniors complex. While South Western Regional Centre (in Chatham) was sold for a reported $150,000 and recently demolished with plans to develop separate parcels of land for hobby farms. 

Yet the sale of these sites leaves activists and survivors with questions about how the redevelopment of these sites, particularly to private buyers, erases histories of abuse and the lived experiences of inmates. Given how private buyers have trivialized and exploited the history of these spaces south of the boarder, there are serious concerns the province needs to address. 

There is no question these sites were oppressive and abusive. While there has been a successful class action lawsuit on behalf of survivors and the province has apologized, the province's redevelopment of these sites has helped erase these spaces and what survivors endured within them. More on the complexities of the redevelopment process can be found in a chapter I co-authored with Jijian Voronka in the book Disability Incarcerated. 

These sites, while horrific, are an important part of the history of disability in this province, and speak to one of the many ways incarceration has been packaged and sold as a policy solution (a practice that continues today through various policy responses to disability). Please take a moment and take advantage of this opportunity to let the province know that respecting and preserving this history is important. 

Lights... Camera... Attitude!

If you're interested in disability, arts, and culture, check out Lights... Camera... Attitude! Funded by the RBC Foundation and out of Ryerson's Institute for Disability Studies Research and Education, this research explores a wide range of issues including disability representation, the role of arts and culture in political change, and the role of audience members in this process. 

This is a great foundational piece for those interested in disability arts and representation, disability studies, activism, and disability culture. 

Book Review - "Working Men's Bodies"

My Review of John Field's book, Working Men's Bodies: Work Camps in Britain, 1880-1940 is now posted on the Humanities and Social Sciences Online. It can be found in the H-Disability section, which explores historical issues around the experiences of disability. The full book review can be found here. 

Gifts & Assets Ontario: Action to Support Disabled Persons Receiving ODSP

Many people are under the assumption that those receiving the Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) have all of their immediate needs covered. But this is not the case as the maximum amount an ODSP recipient can access ($1,110 per month) puts ODSP recipients on and/or below the poverty line. 

Consider the following: 

• In 2014 the average expenditure for housing was $1617 and $675 for food - way below the maximum level an ODSP recipient can receive.

• Cuts and a failure to keep pace with inflation have meant that ODSP payments have failed to reflect the cost of living. In fact, it would require a 25% increase to the rate a single person receives for ODSP to even be worth what it was in 1994. 

Additionally, there are costs disabled persons incur that are not adequately covered by ODSP. These include: 

1. Safe and accessible housing.
2. Adequate and healthy foods.
3. Adaptive equipments and accessibility needs.
4. Transportation related costs. 
5. Fee-for-service disability supports.
6. Clothing and recreational expenses. 

While we certainly need to raise the rates for ODSP recipients, we also need to do away with outdated regulations that prevent persons on ODSP from receiving gifts and assets. This is a quick fix that the province of Ontario could implement immediately (like BC has done) to better support the economic well being of ODSP recipients.  

How can you help? 

• Visit the Gifts and Assets website to learn more.
• Join the coalition for change. 
• Follow Gifts & Assets on Twitter.
• Share information about this effort with your networks. 

Housing Trust for Adults with Intellectual Disabilities in Ottawa-Carleton

I was fortunate enough to work as a part of a wonderful team of researchers for a recent exploratory study on the feasibility of a housing trust for persons with intellectual disabilities in the Ottawa-Carleton region. 

Through Citizen Advocacy Ottawa, our research team worked with individuals, stakeholders, and advocates to explore the housing needs of persons with intellectual disabilities as well as how the establishment of a local housing trust would help to address the housing crisis. 

Some of the key findings from this research include: 

• The ageing population, both in terms of caregivers and disabled adults, has created an urgent need to identify and implement innovative housing models, like a housing trust, in this region.  

• Housing trusts are a part of a broader housing continuum that can offer greater options for independent living and affordable housing. 

• Community members need a strong continuum of housing choice to ensure inclusion and personal autonomy.  

• Existing gaps within parallel areas of disability support require policy makers to proactively work to promote a holistic lens where disability supports are concerned. 

• It is vital that future housing models separate housing costs from from support costs to ensure conflicting interests are minimized and that housing requirements can be met using various sources of funding. 

The full research report can now be accessed online. 

Disability Politics in a Global Economy - Available for pre-order

Disability Politics in a Global Economy is now available for pre-order. 

I'm incredibly excited to be a part of this book, which examines the legacy of Marta Russell. 

This interdisciplinary collection, which helps situate the marginalization of disabled bodies, draws on the work of scholars and activists interested in law, political economy, education, and disability studies. 

Marta Russell scholarship and activism have left an important mark where disability rights are concerned, and as the chapters in this collection illustrate, her insights continue to shape the disability rights movement. 

Disability, Exploitation, and Work

While it's not a new issue, exploitive labour practices for disabled folks in Canada continues to get sporadic media coverage. Most recently, a piece appeared on rabble.ca about these practices. 

This piece, which I am quoted in, touches on my own research around sheltered workshops. It also includes insight from Dr. Ravi Malholtra - who has been instrumental in addressing permits that allow employers to pay disabled employees below the minimum wage. 

It is important to continue to address these forms of economic exploitation as these archaic practices persist (and even thrive) where disabled bodies are concerned. 

Dyslexia, Disability Simulation, & Media Coverage

It’s not often I notice dyslexia trending on social media, so when I saw it this morning I was intrigued. I was disappointed to learn dyslexia was trending and getting all kinds of press because of a new simulation that uses a computer code to continually scramble letters within the text. I’ll be honest; I got my hopes up and thought this might actually be a story that mattered – maybe a story about building a more inclusive curriculum or supporting invisible disabilities in the work place. Needless to say, dyslexia wasn’t trending for either one of those reasons.  It turns out it was trending because it seems folks cannot get enough of disability simulations. The news that a coder had created an experience to mimic how a friend described dyslexia, was enough to really excite a lot of people. But there are so many aspects to this code, disability simulation, media coverage, and the public response to these types of things that are problematic. Below are a few of my quick (and messy) thoughts on why this bothers me... 

First, let me start with the obvious, there is nothing new about jumbling up words so non-dyslexic folks can experience what it’s like for dyslexic folks when they read. I’ve lost count of how many times this has been done and framed as some innovate insight into the dyslexic mind. This may not be something a coder has done before, but even still, why exactly is this newsworthy now?

Second, the lived experience of disability varies. Each person will have a different experience and this experience can and will change over time. There is no one standard set of experiences that illustrate what it’s like to read with learning disabilities or dyslexia.  Also learning disability and dyslexia are more than simply jumbled words for readers. This actually matters quite a bit because covering dyslexia in this way reinforces stereotypes about dyslexia and in doing so you leave little room for the wide range of experiences and individualized accommodations.

Third, by shifting the discussion to “what the world looks like to them” you also end up framing disability related barriers as inevitable. If this is how dyslexic folks see words, what can really be done about it besides feel sorry for us? It turns out quite a bit. There is a growing and endless list of things that can be done to make things more accessible for dyslexic folks. Dyslexic folks don’t struggle in school and work because they are incapable of learning and working –they struggle because they are faced with countless (removable & preventable) barriers. If you really want to know what it’s like to face disability related barriers listen to dyslexic folks, respect their individual needs, and stop questioning their need for accommodation.

Fourth this kind of simulation ignores the complexity of the brain and a whole body of research, literature, and self-advocacy that works to highlight the value inherent in the diversity of our brains. There are real benefits reflected in this diversity. Yet these kinds of simulations completely ignore this.

There is a growing body of work that problematizes these kinds of disability simulations, for a number of reasons, including those I’ve outlined above. What is needed now is for individuals and the media to start giving space for coverage around dyslexia (and other disabilities) that is reflective of the very real systemic and attitudinal barriers that prevent dyslexic folks from accessing the same opportunities as their peers.

E.T. Kingsley Historical Archive

For those interested in disability history, particularly those interested in efforts by scholars, historians, and activists to uncover "hidden" histories of disability, the launch of the E.T. Kingsley Historical Archive is exciting. 

In this unique digital archive (and the forthcoming book under contract with UBC press) Dr. Ravi Malhotra and Dr. Benjamin Isitt explore the life and career of American-Canadian Eugene T. Kingsley. 

What many do not know is that Eugene T. Kingsley, who was a central leader of the Socialist Party of Canada, was also a double amputee. This now visible aspect of his life illustrates important intersections between class, disability and socialism in the Pacific Northwest. This online historical archive provides a rich and accessible glimpse into aspects of his life which until now were almost entirely absent from the historical record. 

Exploitive Labour for Disabled is not Work

The federal government's announcement to shut down a wastepaper disposal plant sparked public outrage as it was reported 50 individuals with disabilities would lose their "jobs". While this sudden change would indeed impact the daily routine of 50 people with disabilities (and this is certainly something that must be addressed), the public outcry and government's quick extension of this program ignore the real problem at hand. 

This program isn't a form of employment for persons with disabilities. This program is part of a larger system that routinely promotes exploitive labour as a policy solution for persons with disabilities. This is not acceptable. 

The coverage of this specific case has ignored some very important points with respect to this labour. While some people did ask important questions about these "wages" ($1.15 an hour), much of the media coverage on this issue defers back to OCAPDD (the agency that runs this program) to clarify this issue. This is where a critical lens is lacking. 

There is a very good reason why OCAPDD classifies this pay as an "honorarium" rather than a "wage". This is a purposeful measure to get around existing employment standards. This is also why these types of programs do not classify recipients as "employees" but rather frame these experiences differently. In OCAPDD's case, these activities are framed as "enclave-type work experiences for adults with developmental disabilities." Yet, in terms of drumming up public support for this program, OCAPDD had no problem framing this issue as one in which 50 individuals with disabilities would callously lose their "jobs" because of a dispassionate government  decision. 

OCAPDD's executive director was quick to address the publics discomfort with these low wages, claiming in news reports their "ideal" aim was to get workers to a minimum wage and suggested the reason the agency is not there yet is because this program was establish "long before any concern about that kind of standard." This isn't true. In 1973 the Welch Green Paper noted concerns with scandalously low wages within community-based sheltered workshops and suggested the need for more "normalized" labour relations that took into consideration the needs of families, individuals, and industry. We have known for a long time that these kinds of programs are problematic - to frame this discomfort as a new issue or concern is disingenuous. 

In fact, there is ample research that illustrates the success of non-exploitive program alternatives. This includes research that compares these types of programs to supported employment models and finds persons with disabilities overwhelmingly prefer supported employment. Additionally, research on this issue also finds non-exploitive models are more successful in terms of transitioning into paid employment, facilitating stronger social networks, and indicate significantly higher levels of success in a number of indicators linked to inclusion. In short, research show us the many ways OCAPDD's model fails the employment and inclusion goals of persons with disabilities (if you want to learn more on this issue the National Disability Rights Network has a great piece). 

There are bigger questions we need to be asking including the role of various levels of government in supporting these programs, corporate incentives in contracting this labour out and parallel impacts this has on existing workforces, why people with disabilities are not being hired directly by these contractors, and greater transparency in terms of how agencies like OCAPDD operate both as a social services and a business. 

This is not to say that participants did not enjoy these activities, or that the federal government does not have a responsibility to these individuals. Rather, this case illustrates the need to critically evaluate supports and services that provide profit and cost-saving measures for organizations and contractors at the expense of persons with intellectual disabilities. There are solutions that support the training and social needs of participants without violating employment standards -  we need to demand these. 

Different but not Broken: Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D & Disability

If you are interested in disability representation in pop culture, you might want to check out a guest post I wrote on disability in the television show Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. This post "Different but not Broken: Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D & Disability" can be read over at The Nerds of Color or The Disability Visibility Project. 

A big thank you to Alice Wong for her continued support and encouragement on all things nerd, sociological, and academic! 

Strength in Uncertain Times: IL Philosophy, Service Delivery, and Canadians with Disabilities

There have been drastic changes to the way the federal government administers various programs. Yet  many are unaware of what these changes mean for disability organizations and persons with disabilities. 

To lear more, check out this recent piece in Abilities "Strength in Uncertain Times: IL Philosophy, Service Delivery, and Canadians with Disabilities." 

Ontario’s Pre-Budget Consultations: Make sure your voice is heard!

Ontario’s Minister of Finance is currently hosting pre-budget consultations with individuals, organizations, associations, and stakeholders across the province.

There are a number of different ways to ensure your voice is heard, and for the first time ever you can provide feedback digitally. 

Below are all the different ways you can share your feedback:

•  Use the Budget Talks website to rate issues that matter the most to you (including disability & employment):

•  Through Twitter by following or Tweeting the Ontario Government at @ONgov. Remember to use #BudgetTalks as your hashtag to ensure you're part of the conversation! 

• Through email submissions to submissions@ontario.ca. Email submissions are a great way to share longer needs, concerns and thoughts.  

• Through in-person and telephone Town Halls. To see dates and time and learn more check this website. 

• Contact the Government of Ontario by email, mail, fax or TTY to share your thoughts. 

There are a number of ways to ensure the needs of the disability community are heard before the budget – lets all make sure the Minister of Finance knows how important a real investment in comprehensive disability supports (i.e. housing, employment, transportation etc.) is to this community. 

Campaign for Peace and Democracy Coverage of Disability Rights

The Campaign for Peace and Democracy has posted speaking notes from our recent presentations around disability rights (including my piece on unpaid labour and intellectual disability). 

Check these out for some great insight into the history of disability rights and the continued fight for equity. 

While there be sure to check out some of the amazing work the Campaign for Peace and Justice is doing to promote progressive and non-militaristic foreign policy. 

When will workers with Intellectual Disabilities get a fair wage?

A report about unionized workers at a state owned building in Ohio being replaced by non-unionized workers with intellectual disabilities caught my eye this week. While the report details the problematic nature of replacing unionized employees with non-unionized employees, for me this particular case speaks directly to the kinds of issues my own research around disability and employment seeks to address. 

On the surface this case illustrates the way unionized work has been demonized in recent years and positioned as a luxury taxpayers can no longer afford. Yet, upon closer examination this is clearly not the case. Indeed as the report illustrates, unionized employees were struggling to support their families. 

While a spokesperson for the Department of Administrative Services defended this move by stating that this move was also in accordance with state policy around hiring persons with disabilities, this line of reason is problematic for several reasons. While gaining employment for persons with disabilities, specifically persons with intellectual disabilities (who face significant employment barriers), is important, this issue is far more complex. 

When we as a community advocate for paid employment, we are not just seeking a paycheck. Fair and equitable employment includes benefits, job protection, opportunities for advancement, and the same wages non-disabled workers receive. In this particular case, the state has eliminated unionized positions while at the same time bringing down the average hourly wage of $10 for non-disabled unionized workers, to $7.85 an hour for workers with intellectual disabilities. While persons with intellectual disabilities may have found employment, there should be no debate that there is a significant economic benefit for the state in reducing wages and benefits. 

There is also no question that with this move the state is benefiting from the exploitation of workers with disabilities. By contracting this labour through Lott Industries (a service organization for persons with intellectual disabilities), the state has reduced their overall costs by $75,000 (not at all surprising since the working conditions have been drastically altered under this new arrangement as Lott industries' 'participants' are non-unionized). The trend of contracting out to disability organizations whose mandate is to find "employment opportunities" for persons with intellectual disabilities highlights problematic aspects within the disability service sector that see these organizations operating like for-profit companies rather than as advocates for social and economic equity. Although veiled in the rhetoric of 'opportunities for employment', participants do not receive the same wages or benefits of their non-disabled peers, and are often reduced to menial and repetitive tasks with little or no opportunity for advancement. 

Fair and equitable wages and working conditions for persons with intellectual disabilities are   in the best interest of employees with disabilities. Therefore any 'disability organization' that gains a competitive advantage by 'selling' the labour of persons with disabilities at a reduced rate is directly profiting from the marginalized economic status of workers with disabilities. 

Despite being framed as an act of goodwill by the state towards the disability community, there are no 'winners' when wages are reduced and benefits are cut. As a community, we should be outraged when employment opportunities for persons with disabilities are advanced on the grounds that workers with disabilities are less deserving than their non-disabled peers.  

A Legacy of Exploitation: Intellectual disability, unpaid labor, & disability services

The New Politics Summer 2012 issue has a symposium on Disability Rights. 


My piece, "A Legacy of Exploitation: Intellectual disability, unpaid labor, & disability services", takes a historical look at the legacy of unpaid work for persons with intellectual disabilities. 


While I'll be adding more as my own research progresses, this piece provides an overview of the issue of unpaid labour and intellectual disability. 

Q & A About My Research

Carleton's Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Affairs did a little Q & A with me about my research. The article can be found online here. Below is the text.

For more information about Carleton's programs or funding visit their website.

Vanier Scholar Gives Back to the Community

In 2010, Carleton PhD student Jihan Abbas was awarded an inaugural Vanier Canada Graduate Scholarship (CGS) that provided $50,000 a year for three years to Canada’s top doctoral students. We thought we would check in with her today to find out what she has been doing since that time.

Q – What kind of a difference has the Vanier Scholarship made in your life?

It has made a tremendous difference. From a research standpoint, it has provided me with the resources necessary to support a participatory research project. Having this support has also enabled me to develop as a scholar as I’ve had the opportunity to write, present, and collaborate with other scholars.

Q – Could you have completed your grad studies at Carleton without this scholarship?

Without the Vanier Scholarship, it certainly would have been difficult to pursue my PhD. The demands of a graduate degree are intense, and without financial support, it would have been impossible for me to juggle my degree, family, and employment, especially given the challenges posed by the current environment. I’m incredibly fortunate to have had this opportunity.

Q – Since we last talked three years ago, are you still researching and working in the area of disability and equality rights?

Yes, my research project is looking at persons with intellectual disabilities and unpaid labour in the home, community, and workplace. I was the former director of research and policy for Independent Living Canada and was fortunate enough to serve as a community co-facilitator with the city of Ottawa to help support the training goals of the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act. I was also on the board of directors for ARCH Disability Law Centre. [ARCH Disability Law Centre is a specialty community legal aid clinic dedicated to defending and advancing the equality rights of people with disabilities in Ontario.] I continue to work as an advocate in the community.

My research is participatory so much of what I am doing is in the community connecting with individuals, advocates and agencies. It’s a valuable experience to step outside of the literature and place yourself on the front lines of the issue. It’s a process that allows you to really appreciate how issues are shaped and experienced by stakeholders.

Q -What are a couple of your major research findings since that time?

We tend to measure contributions through paid labour, and because persons with intellectual disabilities are often not part of the formal labour process, their contributions tend to be ignored. What I am learning from engaging with the community is that there are valuable unpaid contributions taking place that we need to acknowledge and support. My research is also reinforcing the importance of providing a space for the community to be heard. I hope that by illustrating the value of this unpaid labour, I can contribute to the inclusion debate and demonstrate what we collectively gain from equity.

Q – What kind of support have you had from your advisory team and department?

I’ve been lucky to have such a supportive and engaged committee. I am working with Andrea Doucet, now at Brock University, who has been incredibly supportive of my research and really pushed me to explore alternative ways I can connect and communicate with the community. Andrea has been great at helping me to identify the threads within my research that I am most passionate about and find ways to position my research within the broader employment and disability debate. Janet Siltanen and Xiaobei Chen also sit on my committee and were instrumental in moving me through the comprehensive exam and proposal process. My committee has been incredible and really helped me zero in on the kinds of contributions I wanted to make through my own research. It’s been a very collaborative process and has certainly helped develop my research and writing.

Q – Why did you originally decide to pursue your grad studies at Carleton?

For me, Carleton made sense because studying here allowed me to remain connected to my community and continue to engage as an advocate. In terms of disability issues, Ottawa is a great place to be. I’ve had the opportunity to connect with incredible people though my research (individuals, scholars, advocates, peers) and that has helped to make this such a valuable experience.