Feminist Perspective and the Physically Disabled

So many times we fail to ask ourselves why our system of government works the way it does, and we fail to recognize or challenge many of the oppressive features of these systems we live in.  Our beliefs have consequences.  That is why a feminist theory is a very important perspective.  It draws “attention to the subtle, unconscious, and daily exercise of attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors which define and reinforce a despised status” (Robbins et al., 2006, p. 97). 

We read an article in class last week entitled Identifying Gendered Outcomes and Gender-Neutral Policies by Peggy Quinn.  This article really made me reconsider the subtle assumptions behind many of our current social policies, and how these assumptions continue to disenfranchise women. 

Individuals with severe physical impairments require a lot of care.  Tasks we take for granted like bathing or eating often take twice as much time and energy for those with extensive physical disabilities, and often require the help of someone else.  But who will step in to meet these needs?

I don’t believe institutionalizing those with severe physical impairments is the best solution.  These institutions are often over-crowded and under staffed, and the care given to those with disabilities is often far below what it should be.  For those with disabilities, living in sterile institutions, away from the comforts of a family and home can also have adverse effects on mental health.   As well, a stigmatization also comes from keeping those with physical impairments “locked away” and separated from their communities.  And so, as Peggy Quinn points out, social policies like the Community Mental Health Centers Act (CMHC) of 1963, and the Social Security Act Amendments of 1983 were made to return these patients to the “most natural setting possible, which according to the experts who proposed this policy, was the family” (Quinn, 1996, p.197-198).

I agree the ideal place for those who need care is with their families.  However, a feminist perspective encourages us to pay attention to how these social policies may be affecting women.  In our society, gender comes with specific rules and roles one is expected to follow.  One of these assumed gender roles for women is an expectation to selflessly take care of their families, while men are expected to support the family financially.  Peggy Quinn points out, that despite the feminist movements and emergence of women into the workforce, women’s main role is still to provide care to their families- without financial compensation, and often at the cost of their own careers and interests (Quinn, 1996, p. 201).  Will women ever truly become equal citizens if they’re expected to be the primary caregivers as well as maintain a career and family? 

Perhaps the best solution would be for governments to recognize the oppressiveness in these policies lies in the assumption that family care is still women’s work.  Therefore, a revised social policy may consist of governments providing support for these families with well trained and quality in home care in order to relieve the burden on women. That way, those with disabilities can remain in their own environment with people they love, while women will receive the help they need to choose the direction of their own lives, whether it be at home or in the workforce.

-Erin Roche

Bibliography

Quinn, P. (1996). Identifying gendered outcomes of gender-neutral policies. Affilia

11(2), 195-206.

Robbins, S. P., Chatterjee, P.  & Canda, E.  R. (2006). Contemporary Human Behavior Theory: A Critical Perspective for Social Work.  Boston: Allyn and Bacon.