Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T08:15:38.476Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Democratizing Disability: Achieving Inclusion (without Assimilation) through “Participatory Parity”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 September 2014

Amber Knight
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

More than two decades after the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (1990), people with disabilities continue to live at the margins of American democracy and capitalist society. This persistent exclusion poses a conundrum to political theorists committed to disability rights, multiculturalism, and social justice. Drawing from feminist insights, specifically the work of Nancy Fraser, among others, I examine the necessary conditions for meaningful inclusion to be realized within a deliberative democracy. Using Fraser's concept of “participatory parity” as a proxy for inclusion, I strategize how to overcome informal barriers—economic inequality and misrecognition—that persist even after disabled people are granted the legal right to participate. The analysis concludes that a truly inclusionary and multicultural democracy requires the redistribution of wealth and a more expansive model of political deliberation, one that can recognize unconventional (even nonverbal) modes of communication through practices of translation.

Type
Articles
Information
Hypatia , Volume 30 , Issue 1: Special Issue: New Conversations in Feminist Disability Studies , Winter 2015 , pp. 97 - 114
Copyright
Copyright © 2015 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

I would like to thank the anonymous reviewers, Susan Bickford, Michael Lienesch, Jeff Spinner‐Halev, Joanne Hershfield, and Michele Berger for comments on earlier versions of this article.

References

Albrecht, Gary, and Devlieger, Patrick. 1999. The disability paradox: High quality of life against all odds. Social Science and Medicine 48 (8): 977–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alcoff, Linda Martín. 1991–1992. The problem of speaking for others. Cultural Critique 20 (Winter): 5–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barber, Benjamin. 1984. Strong democracy: Participatory politics for a new age. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Barnes, Colin, and Mercer, Geoff. 2001. Disability culture: Assimilation or inclusion? In The handbook of disability studies, ed. Albrecht, Gary, Seelman, Katherine and Bury, Michael. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
Benhabib, Seyla, ed. 1996. Democracy and difference: Contesting the boundaries of the political. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bérubé, Michael. 2009. Equality, freedom, and/or justice for all: A response to Martha Nussbaum. Metaphilosophy 40 (3–4): 352–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bickford, Susan. 1996. The dissonance of democracy: Listening, conflict, and citizenship. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohman, James. 1996. Public deliberation: Pluralism, complexity, and democracy. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
, Bohman, , James, and Rehg, William, eds. 1997. Deliberative democracy: Essays on reason and politics. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Brault, Matthew. 2008. Americans with disabilities: 2005. US Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/p70-117.pdf (accessed July 28, 2014).Google Scholar
Carey, Allison. 2009. On the margins of citizenship: Intellectual disability and civil rights in twentieth‐century America. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Charlton, James. 1998. Nothing about us without us: Disability oppression and empowerment. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Clifford, Stacy. 2012. Making disability public in deliberative democracy. Contemporary Political Theory 11 (2): 211–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, Lennard. 2010. The end of identity politics: On disability as an unstable category. In The disability studies reader, 3rd edn, ed. Davis, Lennard. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
DeNava, Carmen, Proctor, Bernadette D., and Smith, Jessica C. 2011. Income, poverty, and health insurance coverage in the United States: 2010. Washington, D.C.: US Census Bureau.Google Scholar
Disaboom, . 2008. Disaboom survey reveals 52 percent of Americans would rather be dead than disabled. http://www.prweb.com/releases/Disaboom/Disability/prweb1082094.htm (accessed July 28, 2014).Google Scholar
Dryzek, John. 2002. Deliberative democracy and beyond: Liberals, critics, contestations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, Nancy. 1986. Toward a discourse ethic of solidarity. Praxis International 5 (4): 425–49.Google Scholar
Fraser, Nancy. 1989. Unruly practices: Power, discourse and gender in contemporary social theory. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Fraser, Nancy. 1990. Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. Social Text 25 (26): 56–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, Nancy. 1995. Politics, culture, and public sphere: Toward a postmodern conception. In Social postmodernism: Beyond identity politics, ed. Nicholson, Linda and Seidman, Steven. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fraser, Nancy. 1997. Justice interruptus: Critical reflections on the “postsocialist” condition. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fraser, Nancy. 2000. Rethinking recognition. New Left Review 3 (May/June): 107–20.Google Scholar
Fraser, Nancy. 2007. Identity, exclusion, and critique: A response to four critics. European Journal of Political Theory 6 (3): 305–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, Nancy, and Axel, Honneth. 2003. Redistribution or recognition? A philosophical exchange. London: Verso Books.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1990. Moral consciousness and communicative action. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1996. Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 2004. Public space and political public sphere: The biographical roots of my two motifs of thought. Kyoto: Inamori Foundation.Google Scholar
Illingworth, Patricia, and Parmet, Wendy. 2000. Positively disabled: The relationship between the definition of disability and rights under the ADA. In Americans with disabilities: Exploring implications of law for individuals and institutions, ed. Pickering Francis, Leslie and Silvers, Anita. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kittay, Eva Feder. 2000. At home with my daughter. In Americans with disabilities: exploring implications of law for individuals and institutions, ed. Pickering Francis, Leslie and Silvers, Anita. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kittay, Eva Feder. 2001. When caring is just and justice is caring: justice and mental retardation. Public Culture 13 (3): 557–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 1980. Beyond adversary democracy. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Marshall, Thomas Humphrey. 1950. Citizenship and social class. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McRuer, Robert. 2006. Crip theory: Cultural signs of queerness and disability. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Mintz, Susannah. 2007. Unruly bodies: Life writing by women with disabilities. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, Martha. 2009. The capabilities of people with cognitive disabilities. Metaphilosophy 40 (3–4): 331–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliver, Michael. 1990. The politics of disablement. London: Macmillan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, John. 2005. Political liberalism, expanded edn. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Schur, Lisa, and Kruse, Douglas. 2008. Fact sheet: Disability and voter turnout in the 2008 elections. New Brunswick, N.J.: School of Management and Labor Relations, Rutgers University.Google Scholar
Shakespeare, Tom. 2006. The social model of disability. In The disability studies reader, 2nd edn, ed. Davis, Lennard. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Silvers, Anita. 1998. Formal justice. In Disability, difference, discrimination, ed. Silvers, Anita, Wasserman, David and Mahowald, Mary. New York: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
Solomon, Andrew. 2008. The autism rights movement. New York Magazine. http://nymag.com/news/features/47225/ (accessed July 28, 2014).Google Scholar
Stapleton, David, O'Day, Bonnie L., Livermore, Gina A., and Imparato, Andrew J. 2006. Dismantling the poverty trap: Disability policy for the twenty‐first century. The Milbank Quarterly 84 (4): 701–32.Google ScholarPubMed
tenBroek, Jacobus. 1966. The right to live in the world: The disabled in the law of torts. California Law Review 54 (2): 841–919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, Iris Marion. 2000. Inclusion and democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Young, Jonathan, ed. 2011. Progress report 2011. National Council on Disability. http://www.ncd.gov/progress_reports/Oct312011 (accessed July 28, 2014).Google Scholar