lollardfish (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
lollardfish) wrote2008-10-26 04:33 pm
lollardfish) wrote2008-10-26 04:33 pm
More thoughts on Sarah Palin and Disability
Again, link to KOS. I'm not really sure why I'm writing there, but I sort of enjoy the 10 minutes of frenetic commentary before it dies in the noise of that mad site. And why yes, I am not writing my conference paper when writing these essays, but ... I'm hoping that writing leads me back to writing. It always has before. I think I have a good intro on that paper now ...
-----------
Here's the crux - stop saying Sarah Palin is a bad mom. Even if it's true, it doesn't help us elect more and better Democrats, and isn't that what counts? I'm not just talking about 2008, but if Palin remains on the scene, Trig is going to be a pretty cute talking point for her in 2012 too. It's critical that even those who hate her understand the power that the issue of special-needs children has for her, across party lines.
But there's plenty to be angry at on this issue. Here are my thoughts.
Over the past few weeks as I've been writing about Sarah Palin and Trig, both on the internet and once in print, I've gotten many supporting emails and comments from like-minded liberals that have been filled with rage. The comments trend into two groups.
1. Sarah Palin is a bad mom (because Trig needs her attention).
2. Sarah Palin is using her children (and thus is a bad mom).
Even if either were true, and let me tell you that I am plenty angry, neither of them is a useful talking point.
For the first point, a lot depends on Todd. Trig is going to need a lot of special care - therapists of all sorts initially, special ed. teachers down the road. Parents are the key advocates for their children, and parents are the key therapists, too. My son's therapists don't teach my son how to do things, they teach me and my wife how to integrate therapies into his everyday play. Is Todd doing that? Is Sarah when she's got the time? I can't say and neither can you. Moreover, there's no research of which I am aware demonstrating that children with Down syndrome in good day care do any worse than those at home with parents. My wife and I have made a different choice and trade off over the week, but I'm lucky in that my job allows a lot of flexibility. I would never, ever, want to imply to any mother or father than having a baby with Down syndrome means giving up on the rest of your life. We need to emphasize that having a disabled child means sacrifices, different ones perhaps than having a typical child, but that your life, and their life, will go on. Finally, these two months of Trig's life that he's been out on the trail will probably not have any impact on his health or development. We moved when my son was about Trig's age, it took a few months to get his therapies in line, it's not ideal, but it's ok.
So, to sum up on the first point - having a child with a disability need not mean that you, me, or Sarah Palin has to give up on their hopes and dreams. Such thoughts lead to termination, institutionalization, and/or resentment.
Second point - She's using her children!
If I could use my child to raise Down syndrome awareness, to help get better funding for special ed and health care, to encourage people to do research, to encourage employers (and those setting tax policy) to find places for adults with disabilities in their businesses, to change the way we see disability ... I'd "use" my child in a second. I'd go on tour. I'd speak at any function to which anyone invited me. I'd put him on TV. I'd write op-eds and long-winded posts about him on the internet (oops, busted). He's a child, not a cause, but I have a cause that's worth some effort from both of us. If I thought for a second that "using" him would put him at risk, then that would be different, but ... go back and see point one.
So the problem isn't that Sarah Palin is using Trig, it's how she's using him and it's what she's using him for.
Go back to her "major policy speech" on special needs from the other day. It may be hard to see if Palin fills you with rage, but that first section of her speech is powerful and apolitical. She delivered it well and it was very well written. I despise Palin's politics, but I identify with every moment in that section of the speech (even if I don't use religion as my explanatory force). People who just want to attack Palin need to understand the power of this appeal to families like mine. Awareness matters - Trig increases awareness. Communication of what families like the Palins and the Perrys (that's my family) face - the real challenges, the challenges of perception, and the wonderful blessings - is critical. Understanding is the first step to better services, better support, better funding, and dare I say it, even a better world for our children to grow up in.
Now here's where we go on the attack.
After her long emotional and politically unimpeachable appeal, she gets to her policy proposals. Imagine my surprise! It turns out that the best ways to help children with special needs are two of the McCain signature issues - earmark reform and fighting the Obama tax plan? Wait, what? Really, Governor Palin? It just so happens that your best two ideas for special needs children are also major campaign talking points?
Skip taxes. That's not relevant. The Obama tax plan shows no evidence of having any implications for Special Needs Trusts. But let's look in detail at this earmark issue.
Does she mean to cut earmark funding for a Special Olympics facility in Anchorage? Or all these other Special Olympics earmarks?
What about the earmarks like these for special education?
There's an earmark of just $24,000 to help adults with disabilities become more employable. It's to a school in Pennsylvania, a state central to the GOP plan for this next week. Maybe she thought that King-of-Prussia, Pennsylvania, was in, you know, Germany. It's an easy mistake to make. Or this $99,000 to very isolated schools in Alaska to provide videoconferencing facilities to special ed. classrooms where getting qualified teachers is difficult. Or this earmark for equipment to help with research into Down syndrome, located in Washington, D.C. Governor Palin might find that facility important if she gets to move to the capital. The list (search there, it's easy), goes on and on and on. You can probably find one in your state with a little digging.
So maybe, no, definitely, we do need earmark reform, but these are good programs. To quote a certain Illinois senator, we need a scalpel, not a hatchet.
But even this isn't the big problem with Palin's speech. At the end, she makes a plea to fund the NIH. She said, "For many parents of children with disabilities, the most valuable thing of all is information. Early identification of a cognitive or other disorder, especially autism, can make a life-changing difference. That's why we're going to strengthen NIH. We're going to work on long-term cures, and in the short-term, we're going to work on giving these families better information."
I'm glad she said this. She's right. But we answer - who can say what science will lead us to better diagnoses, cures, treatments? Fruit fly research, for example, which she mocked, has helped with research into autism (as has been widely reported). What about stem cells? Research into alzheimers is currently being adapted for treatment for Down syndrome. The trisomy-21 mutation (the cause of Down syndrome) happens more or less at conception. It turns out that studying stem cells is already giving us great insight into the nature of Down syndrome, allowing scientists to re-create Down syndrome in laboratory mice, and has a lot of potential for the future.
You all see where I am going.
We can attack Palin on the merits of her "policy," not for being a bad mom or "using" Trig. It's not that she's using Trig, it's that she's playing politics with his future and with my son's future.
Now that's something to get angry about.
-----------
Here's the crux - stop saying Sarah Palin is a bad mom. Even if it's true, it doesn't help us elect more and better Democrats, and isn't that what counts? I'm not just talking about 2008, but if Palin remains on the scene, Trig is going to be a pretty cute talking point for her in 2012 too. It's critical that even those who hate her understand the power that the issue of special-needs children has for her, across party lines.
But there's plenty to be angry at on this issue. Here are my thoughts.
Over the past few weeks as I've been writing about Sarah Palin and Trig, both on the internet and once in print, I've gotten many supporting emails and comments from like-minded liberals that have been filled with rage. The comments trend into two groups.
1. Sarah Palin is a bad mom (because Trig needs her attention).
2. Sarah Palin is using her children (and thus is a bad mom).
Even if either were true, and let me tell you that I am plenty angry, neither of them is a useful talking point.
For the first point, a lot depends on Todd. Trig is going to need a lot of special care - therapists of all sorts initially, special ed. teachers down the road. Parents are the key advocates for their children, and parents are the key therapists, too. My son's therapists don't teach my son how to do things, they teach me and my wife how to integrate therapies into his everyday play. Is Todd doing that? Is Sarah when she's got the time? I can't say and neither can you. Moreover, there's no research of which I am aware demonstrating that children with Down syndrome in good day care do any worse than those at home with parents. My wife and I have made a different choice and trade off over the week, but I'm lucky in that my job allows a lot of flexibility. I would never, ever, want to imply to any mother or father than having a baby with Down syndrome means giving up on the rest of your life. We need to emphasize that having a disabled child means sacrifices, different ones perhaps than having a typical child, but that your life, and their life, will go on. Finally, these two months of Trig's life that he's been out on the trail will probably not have any impact on his health or development. We moved when my son was about Trig's age, it took a few months to get his therapies in line, it's not ideal, but it's ok.
So, to sum up on the first point - having a child with a disability need not mean that you, me, or Sarah Palin has to give up on their hopes and dreams. Such thoughts lead to termination, institutionalization, and/or resentment.
Second point - She's using her children!
If I could use my child to raise Down syndrome awareness, to help get better funding for special ed and health care, to encourage people to do research, to encourage employers (and those setting tax policy) to find places for adults with disabilities in their businesses, to change the way we see disability ... I'd "use" my child in a second. I'd go on tour. I'd speak at any function to which anyone invited me. I'd put him on TV. I'd write op-eds and long-winded posts about him on the internet (oops, busted). He's a child, not a cause, but I have a cause that's worth some effort from both of us. If I thought for a second that "using" him would put him at risk, then that would be different, but ... go back and see point one.
So the problem isn't that Sarah Palin is using Trig, it's how she's using him and it's what she's using him for.
Go back to her "major policy speech" on special needs from the other day. It may be hard to see if Palin fills you with rage, but that first section of her speech is powerful and apolitical. She delivered it well and it was very well written. I despise Palin's politics, but I identify with every moment in that section of the speech (even if I don't use religion as my explanatory force). People who just want to attack Palin need to understand the power of this appeal to families like mine. Awareness matters - Trig increases awareness. Communication of what families like the Palins and the Perrys (that's my family) face - the real challenges, the challenges of perception, and the wonderful blessings - is critical. Understanding is the first step to better services, better support, better funding, and dare I say it, even a better world for our children to grow up in.
Now here's where we go on the attack.
After her long emotional and politically unimpeachable appeal, she gets to her policy proposals. Imagine my surprise! It turns out that the best ways to help children with special needs are two of the McCain signature issues - earmark reform and fighting the Obama tax plan? Wait, what? Really, Governor Palin? It just so happens that your best two ideas for special needs children are also major campaign talking points?
Skip taxes. That's not relevant. The Obama tax plan shows no evidence of having any implications for Special Needs Trusts. But let's look in detail at this earmark issue.
Does she mean to cut earmark funding for a Special Olympics facility in Anchorage? Or all these other Special Olympics earmarks?
What about the earmarks like these for special education?
There's an earmark of just $24,000 to help adults with disabilities become more employable. It's to a school in Pennsylvania, a state central to the GOP plan for this next week. Maybe she thought that King-of-Prussia, Pennsylvania, was in, you know, Germany. It's an easy mistake to make. Or this $99,000 to very isolated schools in Alaska to provide videoconferencing facilities to special ed. classrooms where getting qualified teachers is difficult. Or this earmark for equipment to help with research into Down syndrome, located in Washington, D.C. Governor Palin might find that facility important if she gets to move to the capital. The list (search there, it's easy), goes on and on and on. You can probably find one in your state with a little digging.
So maybe, no, definitely, we do need earmark reform, but these are good programs. To quote a certain Illinois senator, we need a scalpel, not a hatchet.
But even this isn't the big problem with Palin's speech. At the end, she makes a plea to fund the NIH. She said, "For many parents of children with disabilities, the most valuable thing of all is information. Early identification of a cognitive or other disorder, especially autism, can make a life-changing difference. That's why we're going to strengthen NIH. We're going to work on long-term cures, and in the short-term, we're going to work on giving these families better information."
I'm glad she said this. She's right. But we answer - who can say what science will lead us to better diagnoses, cures, treatments? Fruit fly research, for example, which she mocked, has helped with research into autism (as has been widely reported). What about stem cells? Research into alzheimers is currently being adapted for treatment for Down syndrome. The trisomy-21 mutation (the cause of Down syndrome) happens more or less at conception. It turns out that studying stem cells is already giving us great insight into the nature of Down syndrome, allowing scientists to re-create Down syndrome in laboratory mice, and has a lot of potential for the future.
You all see where I am going.
We can attack Palin on the merits of her "policy," not for being a bad mom or "using" Trig. It's not that she's using Trig, it's that she's playing politics with his future and with my son's future.
Now that's something to get angry about.
no subject
And I can't help wondering what Palin's position on government help for special needs children was BEFORE she had one of her own.
no subject
I also think she's a bad mom and can, and should, be attacked on that. Here's why: She needs to set an example to all parents with kids with DS and to everyone who doesn't know anyone with DS.
Her example needs to be that she has both the information and the privilege to set the gold standard for care, from birth on. She needs to be the example that everyone else can learn from and be inspired by. This is what leaders DO, if they are any good at all.
Let her inspire new parents of kids with DS to get good info and demand good treatment. Let her inspire the whole country that different kids are kids worth knowing and liking and loving. Let her say that all of us deserve to be as healthy and as well looked after as we possibly can be.
She's NOT just any mom. Comparing whether or not her son is getting whatever therapy is right for him with the actions of any other family isn't useful, but letting the public know that her son is getting the care he deserves WHILE making the point that all special needs people deserve the same gold standard of care is important. Not doing both of these suggests that she's a bad parent. By doing for Trig, and letting the world in on it, she would be doing the best she can for every other person with DS, and for every other family. Not doing both of these suggests she's a bad leader.
Oh, and did anyone else google the Michael T. George house? It looks like it's funded almost entirely with tax dollars.
K.
no subject
Your point is well-made and well-taken. I view her more as a bad leader than a bad parent, but I'm uncomfortable judging parents.
She's certainly not a good advocate for special-needs children and their families.
no subject
That's the starting point. But if you chose a life in the public eye, the bar goes way way way up. Your life is an example to others.
K.
no subject
Sure, that's great. Unless her deeply held philosophical position was and continues to be that the government should not be providing money to help families with their personal problems. Unless, of course, it happens to be HER problem, and then it's great.
What's her position on early childhood education? Subsidized lunch programs? Parenting classes for inner city moms and dads? Programs that help provide band instruments for poor families?