One debate about the deaf community is weather the deaf should be considered “disabled” or not. This discussion is both an issue of personal identity and a political discussion that has real consequences. While I’ve studied this issue in class before, this week I got to see it debated by people it actually effects.
According to Vietnamese law people with disabilities are supposed to receive discounts on transportations costs as well as subsidies and other forms of support. However as the deaf are considered able bodied they are not included in these special provisions. This week HAD decided to discuss the merits and costs of lobbying the government to include the deaf in the definition of disabled.
On one side of the debate various leaders of HAD talked about how they were different from the disabled. In contrast to many disabled people in Vietnam the deaf have a full body, mobility and marketable skills. The deaf can drive motorbikes, find decent work, and are part of a larger community. This puts them in a distinctly different position than many people with disabilities. For example my VSL teacher Thai Anh (also a leader of HAD) has a younger sister who is disabled and house ridden so he has to support her by teaching sign language classes.
The leaders also focused on how labeling themselves as disabled could effect their chances at getting VSL recognized and gaining proper respect.
On the other hand Thanh and some of the other board members discussed how the deaf were cut off from information and access to education. Thanh argued “until the government provides us with proper education and the deaf can enter universities they should give us the same discounts that they give people with disabilities.” This group pointed out that the deaf received discounts in other countries like Australia and the US while still getting their sign languages recognized and respected.
They also debated who they would send to advocate for the law to be changed if they decided to identify as “disabled”. Tuan was considered because he is considered the most well educated board member in written Vietnamese and Vietnamese law, so he would be able to argue their case well. However several of the bard members were worried that he would be perceived as too skilled and therefore would not be successful in getting discounts for the deaf. Therefore they suggested that one of the older deaf people who hadn’t gone to school should go so the government could understand some of the real problems facing the deaf. However the problem with this plan was that older deaf individuals who aren't educated would have a very hard time understanding Vietnamese law and therefore would not be able to advocate well for the deaf community.
This whole discussion really reminded me of how issues of self and identity can be manipulated to achieve political goals. The government was excluding the deaf from the category of disabled to save money on benefits and services. Likewise the board members were discussing manipulating their own group identity to try to win discounts that they saw as rightfully theirs. By identifying (or not identifying) as “disabled” and choosing which members of the community to send they were redefining themselves in a way that would fit their political goals.
No comments:
Post a Comment