Disability Community Responds to NYTimes Article

From the JFA Moderator: The following letter was composed by Not Dead Yet in collaboration with the JFA Action Network with the first signers listed below. We are seeking additional signers. If you would like to add your signature to this letter to Gerald Marzorati, Editor of NY Times Magazine send your name and email to jfa@aapd.com by 12 noon EST Monday August 10, 2009.

In response to    >>> For JFA Post on ther original NYTimes article

Dear Mr. Marzorati:

Was it the New York Times Magazine’s intention to assault or diminish the basic tenets of the disability community's civil rights law virtually on the eve of its 19th anniversary? The New York Times Magazine’s decision to publish Peter Singer's latest long essay entitled 'Why We Must Ration Health Care' (7/15/09) less than two weeks before the anniversary of the signing of the Americans with Disabilities Act demonstrates either deliberate malice or reckless disregard of the reality of disability as an important demographic representative of nearly 20% of the American population.  

As anyone who has read ‘Why We Must Ration Health Care’ knows, Singer spoke “hypothetically” of assigning a life with quadriplegia as roughly half that of a life without any disability at all.  On this “hypothetical” basis, Singer lays out a case for denying health care to people with significant disabilities on the basis that our lives have less value than the lives of nondisabled people.

This is Peter Singer’s most direct assault on the value of the lives of people with physical disabilities past the age of infancy that we have read.  His policy proposals allowing for the killing of newborns with disabilities and people with significant cognitive disabilities are already well known.  

While this is a bolder assault than we have seen from Professor Singer in the past, it’s hardly surprising.  What’s surprising and deeply disturbing is that the NY Times editorial staff have sought him out as a writer on more than one occasion.

To be fair, the NY Times Magazine has published some excellent articles in the past that have covered the disability experience as more than a mere medical issue.  The late Harriet McBryde Johnson had several thoughtful articles published in the NY Times Magazine describing the historical oppression directed at people with disabilities, contrasted with the wonderful opportunities that unfold if that oppression is lifted.  When Harriet died, many of us were taken aback when the NY Times Magazine editors passed over Harriet’s friends and colleagues to write an end-of-year tribute in the year she died.  That honor was bestowed on Professor Singer.  Perhaps we should have taken that as a sign of things to come.

Reluctantly, we have to suspect that the NY Times Magazine accepted this piece because of its content, agreeing with Singer that our lives have lessened value and that we represent a drain on the collective economic and health care resources of our country.  It’s hard to imagine the NY Times Magazine green-lighting an article that targeted any other group in such a way – e.g. immigrants, the poor, or other groups who have been targeted as scapegoats in the health care debates.  Did the editor in charge of publishing this issue even notice that Singer used no factual information at all to support his devaluation of people with disabilities?  

We have to wonder what went through the heads of the editorial staff when they thought about the reactions of readers – with or without disabilities – to the large graphic that read “__ YEARS OF A NONDISABLED LIFE IS WORTH __ YEARS OF A DISABLED LIFE.”

Contrast this with Senator Edward Kennedy’s essay on the fight for universal healthcare in the current issue of Newsweek.  Talking about people with disabilities he said, in part:

Social justice is often the best economics. We can help disabled Americans who want to live in their homes instead of a nursing home. Simple things can make all the difference, like having the money to install handrails or have someone stop by and help every day.

Obviously, the definitions of justice that Senator Kennedy uses are very different from the definitions favored by Peter Singer and the NY Times Magazine.

Without using the term, Senator Kennedy is also describing the social model of disability.  In the traditional medical model of disability, the “problems” of disability are all situated within the person.  The medical model defines people with disabilities as having a lower “quality of life” than their nondisabled peers.  In reality, most of the limitations put on people with disabilities are socially defined – and can be remediated in the same way.  The Americans with Disabilities Act is built on the principles of that social model, acknowledging that disability is a natural part of life and that society has to reflect that reality in an inclusive and supportive way.

The proposed treatment – or nontreatment – of people with disabilities also violates the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which was signed by US Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice.  She signed the Convention on July 30th at the direction of President Obama. While the Singer essay violates the spirit and vision of the Convention in numerous ways, the most pertinent section of the document is spelled out in Article 25 (f), in which obligates signatories to “prevent discriminatory denial of health care or health services or food and fluids on the basis of disability.”  This is important. Article 4(d) states that countries that have signed the Convention agree to “refrain from engaging in any act or practice that is inconsistent with the present Convention.”

The American disability community, Senator Kennedy and an ever-growing majority of the international community all recognize that public policy has to embrace the inherent equality of the lives of people with disabilities – and public policy must reflect that in practice.  The NY Times Magazine and Professor Singer stand opposed to the more progressive voices of social justice, inside and outside of the United States.

We, the undersigned, protest this treatment of people with disabilities within one of the most important public policy debates in our time.  The New York Times Magazine has failed in its public responsibility to treat citizens of the United States with the simple respect we deserve by serving up people with disabilities as a drain on public resources and to legitimize the denial of medical care to those of us who need that support the most.

The editorial staff of the New York Times Magazine needs to meet with representatives of disability advocacy groups, with the following goals:

1.         The NY Times staff needs to define and clarify its understanding of disability as a basic human rights issue.
2.         If the current stance of the NY Times is that the lives of people with disabilities are, in fact, a drain on health care sources, it should be stated on record.
3.         Discuss training in the basics of covering disability in news stories – beyond the “human interest” and “medical” angles.
4.         Cover the difference between “analysis” and “appealing to bigotry” in public policy discussions.

Urgently,

-ADAPT Chicago
-ADAPT Montana
-American Association of People with Disabilities (AAPD)
-Center for Disability Rights -Disabilities Network of NYC
-Feminist Response in Disability Activism
-Hearing Loss Association of America
-Little People of America
-MetroWest Center for Independent Living
-National Coalition of MH Consumer/Survivor Organizations
-National Association of the Deaf  
-National Center for Environmental Health Strategies
-National Council on Independent Living
-Not Dead Yet
-TASH
-The Autistic Self Advocacy Network
-The Center for Self-Determination
-Topeka Independent Living Resource Center

Comments

[Margaret Holt Baird, Esq.]

Please send this to the NY Times for me:

Dear Editor,

The bigotry of your article suggesting to fix health care, simply stop treating people with disabilities, is no different than that shown by Dr. Joseph Mengele and the Nazis in their devaluing of a race of people based on their prejudices. The Nazi holocaust also included persons with disabilities, and persons who were LGBT.

This initially well-disguised rationale is what lead to the death camps. I am horrifed that the New York Times would give a voice to such hate speech. It is disguised in much the same way as early anti-Jewish rhetoric.

It is a civil rights issue, and in direct conflict with the Americans with Disabilities Act and its Amendments. It is also in direct conflict with the UN Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities, just signed by President Obama. I was privileged as a legal reporter with a disability to work on the Daily Summaries of the treaty formation Ad Hoc Committees now appended to the treaty, and sent to disability NGOs worldwide.

Deceased disability activist Harriet McBryde, Esq. would be horrified that Peter Singer, a known eugenicist, was allowed to do her memorial article.

This article, and that decision is defiling to all world citizens with a disability, and a public apology should be made for the insensitivity to the dignity and human rights of this Constitutionally protected classification of persons by the New York Times.

Margaret Holt Baird, Esq.
Attorney-Mediator, Disability Activist

[Thomas P. Ashbrock]

A Community That Does Not Include People With disABILITIES Is Not A Community At All

[R. Etheredge]

Dr Singers concept is not a new one. A man named Adolph Hitler proposed the same thing in 1938.

[lauren]

it is so sad and discusting to hear and see that article in the new york times to deny people with disabilities healthcare. people who are disable contribute to the economy, they pay taxes. They should be included in the healthcare plans. i my self is a person with aa disability and i work i pay taxes and we should be able to have quality healthcare.

[Steve Brown]

What can I say? When I see Peter Singer has written anything I avoid it because I know he has no clue about my life--even though I, too, am University professor, writer, and activist--and husband, father and many other things. Oh, yes, and a person with a disabiilty!!!!!

[Ralph]

You may use my original comments in your response, as your response doesn't even come close to what I've been saying.

[Bob]

Please add Disability Options Network to the list of undersigned supporting organizations.

[Dr. MJ Hardman (also Prof.)]

Add my signature to all of those above. I'm appalled. I thought we had moved beyond such blatant ignorance & I'm particularly appalled that the title is 'Prof', one that should be of honor and knowleedged.

[Rev. Nancy S. Hildebrand]

I wish articles such as these were always paired with voices of people with disabilities who will speak to the blessings of those living with disabilities. Let more voices of people with disabilities be heard, please.
Rev. Nan Hildebrand

[Kathy Podgers]

Please add my name to those who sign the letter opposing Peter Singer's calous disregard for the lives of millions of people who live with disabilities.

Thank you

Kathy Podgers
148 Pearl St
Cambridge MA 02139
MOD trained Community ASccess Monitor
Citizens for Feasible Compliance
Camdidate for Cambridge City Council
Human Being
Aug 8, 2009

[Alexis Jewell]

Please address my signature in support of the rights of Americans with disabilities.

[Patricia Lockwood]

During hard economic times many of us do turn our distress inward. We worry about being disabled or elderly. We become concerned if we are a burden on those we love. If we do not take the time to stop and remember that the ADA is civil rights legislation that insures our right to life.

Now is the time we should be looking at changing systems to insure more consumer control, making them more cost effective not by building more institutions but by providing people the supports they need.

The article by Doctor Singer just shows how out of line he is with the needs of the nation. What we need is access and jobs. When do we want it? NOW

What needs to be done is that the New York Times needs to stop being his platform.

Pat Lockwood

[Susan Houston]

Please add my name to the list of signers opposing the publication of anything this backward thinking professor writes.

Susan Houston
Wrentham MA.
Branch Operations Manager - Hudson HHC
Chairperson - Wrentham Disability Commission
President - Mass Hospital School Alumni
Treasurer - Ms. Wheelchair Mass Foundation
Board Member - N.E. Medical Equip. Dealers
Person with a Disability!

[Tina Minkowitz]

Recently I attended a meeting of the International Association for Law and Mental Health, where ethicists among others held workshops. Sad to say, Peter Singer's ideas are not unique in his profession. Bioethicists who come from a disability perspective are urgently needed to make inroads there.

[Sherri Cook]

I have often thought that we have become a more educated society, again I was wrong. This is something that if left to narrow minded people to decide what is ethical will set up back 100 years. If you take a stand in medical care you better remember to first do no harm.

[Michael Bishop]

Without the voices of those who are different,we easily build artifices of injustice and cruelty. People have much further to fall without understanding that each voice is of equal importance: without price.
Michal Bishop
Occupational Therapist

[Kathy Brill]

I am deeply saddened to know that the New York Times would even consider printing this type of prejudicial attitude, especially without balancing it with voices of those who have disabilities. Please don't become a tabloid.

[Nam Dang]

This editorial is one-sided and shouldn't have been published in the first place. Where is the other side of the argument?

[Carolyn Schwebel, Ed.D.]

After refusals by Pres. Bush, the U.S. FINALLY signed the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities on July 30,2009 at the direction of President Obama. Singer's article in the New York Times indicates that there are still miles and miles to go!
Carolyn Schwebel, Equalizers, "Advocates for People with Disabiliites"

[Xenia Grant]

Ironic that Peter Singer, whose grandparents died in concentration camps in Poland, would be exposing the same ideology as Hitler. But, sadly it is true.

I am proud to be autistic and autistic culture, like other cultures in this country give vibrancy to the fabric of American life. We are Americans, equal under the eyes of the law and equal under the eyes of God.

Xenia Grant