Problem of Disability Paper

docx

School

St. John's University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

MISC

Subject

Sociology

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by mariann12345music

1 Problem of Disability Paper Mariann Thavaratnam School of Early Childhood Studies, Toronto Metropolitan University CINT 902: Disability Issues Dr. Jessica Moore December 8, 2022

2 Problem of Disability Paper Parks are essential for children's well-being because it allows them to explore the environment around them, as playing outside in nature can contribute to the healthy development of children. Parks are also great for families to create unique connections with their children and help them build social relationships. Accessible parks should allow children with disabilities to express their ideas, have a sense of freedom, and participate in fun activities. However, inaccessible playgrounds for children with disabilities hinders their physical, cognitive and social development. Inaccessible playgrounds persist in Canada today, limiting contacting with peers and causing children with disabilities a sense of being different. It causes deprivation, dependency, and stigmatization. As a result, this paper will discuss the following sub-issues: 1) Inaccessible Playgrounds for Children’s with Disabilities 2) Social, Cultural, and Physical Barriers 3) Strategies to Improve Accessibility in Parks Inaccessible Playgrounds for Children with Disabilities Inaccessible playgrounds for children with disabilities cause alienation/exclusion. Children are at risk for negative, social, learning and health dilemmas (Bedell et al., 2013). In fact, inaccessible playgrounds for children with disabilities leads to exclusion because of the physical barriers posed. For example, children lose the ability to participate in play-based learning due to the lack of equipment and surfaces used in parks (Bedell et al., 2013). Many surfaces that make playgrounds safer for non-disabled children such as a sandbox restricts children with mobility impairments to actively engage in this space (Bedell et al., 2013). According to the accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA), public spaces, including parks don’t adhere to standard #4, Design of Public Spaces Standards. This standard addresses the need for newly developed spaces to cater to children with disabilities to ensure

3 accessibility (Moore, 2022). The standard highlights ways to make the communal spaces more accessible as well. For instance, there are requirements that public spaces must follow for recreational trails, beach access routes, outdoor eating areas, and outdoor public spaces to ensure accessibility. Article 23 or the Convention on the Rights of a Child, indicates that children with disabilities “should enjoy a full and decent life, in conditions which ensure dignity, promote self- reliance and facilitate the child’s active participation in the community” (Moore & Lynch, 2015, pg. 3). Children with disabilities who experience this unequal access to play opportunities due to barriers, including mobility issues, sustaining play with others, understanding play context etc., can impede and alter their level of engagement in parks. Due to unequal opportunities in parks, Taylor et al. (2022) discovered that children’s attitudes and behaviour are reflected in how engaged they are in play-based learning. Their interactions with one another and physical competence play a huge role in determining certain behaviours and attitudes. This is significant because children with disabilities experience exclusion and are alienated from engaging in play, due to inadequate access, lack of ramps equipment’s, uneven surfaces, and limited opportunities for social competence in parks. These forms of inaccessibility’s in parks still exist today because it is reflected in the medical model of disability. This approach can influence how disabled people are viewed and treated negatively (Taylor et al., 2022) Davis (2013) argues that the medical model reproduces and sustains various discriminatory practices. He reminds us that we live in a society filled with norms and stereotypes that affect how we view and perceive individuals with disabilities. Collectively, we have this obsession of judging and comparing ourselves against the measures of normalcy. For instance, we tend to reflect on our physical aspects and compare our height, body type, weight,

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

4 social competence etc. This model creates physical, social and institutional barriers for children with disabilities because these views are normalized. Likewise, due to societies negative views and assumptions, parks continue to cater to non-disabled children because children with disabilities are labelled as ‘lacking and deficient’, according to Moore (2022). Therefore, the medical model is different from the social model because it challenges the way we perceive impairment (Davis, 2013). The social model refrains from labelling individuals as ‘lacking or deficient’. It seeks to find ways on how social structures impair individuals, including the lack of ramps, brightness of colour, uneven surfaces in parks etc. (Moore, 2022). In addition, parks continue to cater to non-disabled children rather than disabled children because there are policies that shape the global system of inequalities due to ableism. Ableism often refers to the explicit bias of inaccessible spaces against disabled people in favour of abled- bodied individuals (Moore, 2022). In the field of ECS, inaccessible playgrounds are built for non-disabled children where their individual differences between able-bodies and disabled children are played out (Yantzi, 2010). Classroom settings are often constructed and designed to keep disabled children in place (Yantzi, 2010). Schools and classrooms are organized to separate children accordingly by their social, sensory, cognitive, physical, and emotional differences from non-disabled children (Yantzi, 2010). As a result, inaccessible parks continue to exist today due to discriminatory practices, stereotypes and more. Social, Cultural and Physical Barriers The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child states that play is integral to the development of children and a fundamental right. According to United Nations (2020), it reassures that all individuals with different impairments should have a sense of fundamental freedoms and enjoy all human rights. Although parks are significant environments that impact

5 children during their childhood and help children have the opportunity to develop motor skills, learn to push their limits, interact with others etc. Most parks don’t accommodate for children with disabilities to ensure active participation, contributing to various social, cultural and physical barriers. Social Barriers Yantzi et al (2010) justifies that children do not experience the same amount of stimulation in classrooms as they do in parks. As many types of play spaces such as streets, fields, playgrounds are “too risky”, parks represent a space where children are able to interact with their peers and congregate with one another in a safely manner. It is a space where children are able to master their current realities through discovery and build social skills. Parks are a great way to foster a sense of social competence amongst children, but inaccessible parks prevent children from enjoying their rights. According to United Nations (2020), article 29 states that individuals can participate fully in political and public life. These rights are important because it helps define the means of personal and collective freedoms (Moore, 2022). However, inaccessible parks obstruct children’s social abilities. In an inaccessible space, children feel extremely alienated from society because they are not able to engage in the same play space as other children due to their physical abilities. In fact, Yantzi et al (2010) found that disabled children were often exuded from playgrounds, since surface materials such as sand and gravel restricted them from the effective use of mobility devices. Children are unable to maneuver around the play space effectively, restricting them from engaging in play with their peers. For example, children with autism experience fewer social initiations with peers in an inaccessible environment because there is a lack of objects to help stimulate their mind, such as sensory toys (Moore & Lynch, 2015). These sensory toys can help children demonstrate the use

6 of manipulation of objects with peers, demonstrate interest, and foster close knit relationships with peers. When a space is accessible for children with disabilities to fully participate in, they can socially interact with others effectively. Cultural Barriers Cultural factors can affect access to playgrounds in various ways. Values and norms in society can prevent accessibility of parks for children with disabilities (Sokal & Katz, 2015). Studies show that gender differences and racial discrimination can increase the likelihood of inequality in parks (Sokal & Katz, 2015). For example, Sokal & Katz (2015) states that girls with a disability were less likely than boys with same condition to access parks and 5% of children experience discrimination when accessing the parks. In Canada, evidence shows that children with disabilities face a high percentage of cultural barriers than non-disabled children (Sokal & Katz, 2015). These individuals may also face racial slurs and sexist stereotypes within the same environment because of their physical disability. Unfortunately, the reason for many of these cultural barriers existing today is because individuals are unaware of the culture of disability. Often times, when a space is inaccessible for children with disability, it is caused by the lack of attention to the culture of disability (Sokal & Katz, 2015). Brown (2002) argues that disability identity and culture encapsulates attitudes, morals, beliefs and norms in accordance with the experiences of disabled individuals. The disability culture focuses on ways of examining the culture, including 1) historical, 2) social and political and 3) personal and aesthetic (Moore, 2022). Moore (2022) states that the historical aspect focuses on art, language, poetry developed by disabled people. Social and political aspect focuses on the values of social, political and self-empowerment. The personal and aesthetic aspect addresses positive self-value, and identification.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

7 On the other hand, different cultures have different outlooks and views of children with disabilities and treat them in various ways. For instance, in the Asian culture, such as India, a young girl is considered to resemble her mother and a boy like his father. When this doesn’t occur, it can disrupt the ideologies of society. In traditional settings, families may question whether their child has been possessed by an evil spirit or seen as “challenging”. Parents tend to feel isolated from the rest of the community due to the possible stigmas and discrimination of disabled children that make them feel insecure and ashamed. As a result, families and parents tend to avoid social settings, including parks and playgrounds. Children’s behaviour is also viewed differently across cultures. For instance, a child on the autism spectrum may be viewed as “stubborn” when he/she cannot abide by instructions or lacking and deficient. In fact, many cultures often use such derogatory and discriminatory language practices to diminish the lives of those who identify as disabled (Moore, 2022). Many dergatory terms remain a part of our everyday vocabulary because it is embedded into our day- to-day conversations with people (Moore, 2022). Moore (2022) states that society tends to disregard the ways language practices continue to associate the disability community as lacking and deficient. Physical Barriers For children with physical disabilities who use a mobility device to navigate around. There are various inaccessible routes, lack or ramps and parking areas that restrict children entering parks. Internal mobility is often prohibited due to inadequate access of elevated play structures such as the lack or ramps and transfer systems. Most ground-level structures also lack diversity of experiences for children. According to Jampel (2018), we see intersectionality and layers of oppression at play. Intersectionality is a strategy for understanding marginalization and

8 exclusion. When we depend heavily on stereotypes and create walls rather than bridges, it gives room for the conditions of marginalization and exclusion to thrive in (Moore, 2022). The experiences children with disabilities have may become heightened through other forms of discrimination, such as sexism and racism. These forms of discrimination create physical barriers that prevent children with disabilities from participating fully within society. For instance, there are mobility barriers within urban areas, including parks. In parks, there are several inaccessible entrances, and trip hazards. Often times, there are equipment’s that don’t cater to children with mobility needs, including bikes, see saws, slides, swings etc. Strategies to Improve Accessibility in Parks To eliminate exclusion in parks amongst children with disabilities, the social model of disability will consider the approach in countering such hegemonic concepts. The social model of disability will focus on certain problems caused by disabling environment, which will reflect various holistic approaches. However, these holistic approaches can only be proposed if society stops looking at what is wrong with an individual rather than what that person needs, which reflects the medical model of disability. For example, since many parks don’t have ramps for mobility device users, the individual is blamed for rather than society itself. This creates low expectations and leads children in losing independence and having control over their own lives. Shifting the blame from the individual to society can eliminate barriers of children. Creating a park more accessible for children with disabilities can help them gain understanding and the right to equal opportunities, stimulate their mind, boost their self-esteem, create strong relationships between families and build a strong future. Therefore, the social model of disability will reflect ways to improve accessibility in parks. It will strive to create a more inclusive environment and promote equality and equity.

9 The social model of disability will look at certain adjustments of the park environment to accommodate the needs of disability individuals. For example, accessibility features for parks can include wide walkways, handrails, ramps, adaptative swings, interactive games, quiet areas, parks signage, and quiet areas. Within the field of ECS, some of the strategies many educators would propose to improve accessibility include the following: 1) Ramps. For children with mobility devices, ramps must be considered. Ramps are extremely beneficial because they enable children to access equipment’s at an eye level point of view. They are also beneficial for children who don’t have access to transfer systems. Having handrails attached to these ramps on both sides can aid children in pulling themselves along. 2) Audible signs. Audible signs can be useful for children with vision loss to navigate around the park independently. They can use speech technology to communicate information usually found on print signs. 3) Guidance ropes. Guidance ropes can help children with vision loss navigate around the park without assistance. It can act as a wayfinding tool, as it steers children with vision loss into the right direction. Often, guidance ropes are bright yellow and knotted at specific points to alert children to a tactile sign or point of interest. This rope system usually begins at the entrance of parks. 4) Wheelchair accessible equipment. Wheelchair-accessible equipment should be implemented to help children who can’t transfer out of their wheelchair, but still want to engage in play. Movement is essential for children with mobility devices to develop balance and coordination. Though, these new modifications cannot be enforced without further support from park directors and the city council. Parks directors of city parks, and the city council can change this

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

10 dominant issue of inaccessibility of parks amongst children with disabilities. Early educators can work alongside park directions and the city council to provide equal opportunities for children to enhance access to educational experiences and provide access by funding for park modifications. To propose these solutions, accessibility polices need to be enforced to achieve accessibility goals. An accessibility plan needs to outline the steps the park needs to prevent and remove barriers for children with disabilities. It needs to ensure that it’s meeting the AODA requirements. The AODA aims to create, implement and enforce accessibility standards for private and public spaces to cater to disability individuals (Stienstra, 2018). By assessing the AODA, ECE’s can reach out to the city council and park directors to enforce new polices of parks. Therefore, the recreation of parks can offer high-quality, safe and innovative playground equipment and experiences for children to play in.

11 References Brown, S. (2002). What Is Disability Culture? Disability Studies Quarterly, 22(2), 34-50. Bedell, G., PhD, Coster, W., PhD, Law, M., PhD, Liljenquist, K., BS, Kao, Y., MA, Teplicky, R., MSc, Anaby, D., PhD, & Khetani, M. A., ScD. (2013). Community participation, supports, and barriers of school-age children with and without disabilities. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 94(2), 315-323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2012.09.024 Davis L. J. (2013). Normality, power, culture. In Davis, L. J. (Ed.), The disability studies reader (4th ed.) (pp. 1–14). Jampel, C. (2018). Intersections of disability justice, racial justice and environmental justice, Environmental Sociology, 4:1, 122-135, DOI: 10.1080/23251042.2018.1424497 Sokal, L., & Katz, J. (2015). Oh, canada: Bridges and barriers to inclusion in canadian schools: Inclusive education in canada. Support for Learning, 30(1), 42-54. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9604.12078 Stienstra, D. (2018). Canadian disability policies in a world of inequalities. Societies 2018, 8(2), 36 Taylor, L. G., Vanderloo, L. M., Arbour-Nicitopoulos, K. P., Leo, J., Gilliland, J., & Tucker, P. (2022). Playground inclusivity for children with a disability: Protocol for a scoping review. JMIR Research Protocols, 11(7), e37312-e37312. https://doi.org/10.2196/37312 Moore, J. (2022). Module 4: Disability Justice, Intersectionality and Critical Theory [External Learning Tool]. Retrieved from https://de.ryerson.ca/de_courses/templates/m/? c=FD5AC6CE504B74460B93610F39E481F7&m=1&p=204450

12 Moore, J. (2022). Module 10: Representations of disability and the Role of Disability Culture External Learning Tool]. Retrieved from https://de.ryerson.ca/de_courses/templates/m/? c=FD5AC6CE504B74460B93610F39E481F7&m=1&p=204450 Moore, J. (2022). Module 3: Normalcy, Ableism, and the Social Model of Disability [External Learning Tool]. Retrieved from https://de.ryerson.ca/de_courses/templates/m/? c=FD5AC6CE504B74460B93610F39E481F7&m=1&p=204450 Moore, A., & Lynch, H. (2015). Accessibility and usability of playground environments for children under 12: A scoping review. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 22(5), 331-344. https://doi.org/10.3109/11038128.2015.1049549 Cancel N. M. Yantzi, N. L. Young & P. Mckeever (2010) The suitability of school playgrounds for physically disabled children, Children's Geographies, 8:1, 65-78, DOI: 10.1080/14733281003650984 United Nations. (2020). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Problem of Disability Paper

Related Documents