|
ripples -> RE: Handicap Parking spot rant (7/13/2007 4:21:28 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainedExistence
Handicapped parking spots are RESERVED for handicapped people whereas those "handicapped toilets" are considered handicapped accessible, rather than reserved. People make use of many handicapped accessible things- ramps instead of stairs, flattened curbs and so on. Mothers with toddlers or babies are often in need of the extra space in a handicapped toilet stall and in fact many places have those baby changers on the wall for just that purpose. However, as in all things...a little courtesy goes a long way, and one can always defer to someone who needs it more.
Many people with disabilities (I'm English - hate the word - handicapped), are often incontinent or semi continent. Thus an available, easily accessible toilet is pretty essential to living a less limited life. Using an accessible toilet when one is non-disabled is not a mere inconvenience, it can be a matter of compromising someone's dignity.
quote:
ORIGINAL: susie
I am quite surprised at the number of complaints by people saying that disabled spaces are abused in the US. I found during my trips there that the problem is far less than it is in the UK. Here people have no regard for the spaces at all. All supermarkets here have disabled spaces but as these are effectively on private land there are no fines for people that abuse them. The supermarket will also not do anything about these people as they are afraid of losing customers.
In my experience, this is inaccurate. Many supermarkets police these spaces and are very willing to approach offenders. Some supermarkets will put stickers on windscreens, some will even broadcast over the tannoy "Will the owner of car VRN: *** please move their vehicle as they are taking a disabled space"
Admittedly, it's a relatively recent improvement, but one, nonetheless.
quote:
ORIGINAL: SardonicAss
Back on topic, you really can't play the "at least you can chase people and can walk a lil extra way" card with me. You can try, but you will not be successful. I'm not saying "yay" for anyone with a disability, not by a long shot. But the chair, the therapy, etc, it's all geared toward making those with disabilities able to function on their own like they once could. It's about minimizing their "handicap" and helping them live as normally as possible. Disabilities are to be overcome, not used as an excuse to pick on others. She's in a chair, that's unfortunate. If I could fix it for her, I'm sure I would. But I can't. What can I do? I can "not" focus on that. I can see her as a person and not a chair and treat her just like I would anyone else being so militant over something so benign. Do lazy asses exist? Yep. They're multiplying too. You can't stop that. All you can do is control how it affects you. I personally have never seen a situation where "every" single handi-space was taken by non-handicapped people. There's bound to be a spot or two there. And what? Because they're in a chair they should never have to deal with a space not being open? If I go to the mall on a busy shopping weekend, I can drive for 30 minutes and still find no spot. Why can't I rant? I'll tell you - it's because no one cares. So a chair does not automatically mean there will always be a spot. Being in a chair doesn't mean the world will bend over backwards to help either.
Not to mention the wholely separate fact that I have personally seen someone in a power chair zipping along the street, no car in sight. He can do it, why can't others? Why's it so hard for someone in a "POWER" chair to take up 2 spaces in the back of the lot and motor on in? There's almost never "no" spaces. If I were in a chair and some ass took the handi-space, I'd find 2 spaces next to each other and pull right into both of 'em. Wouldn't even think twice. Not everything has to be a "war." and every handicapped person doesn't need to be rescued.
This is a noteworthy post, one that illustrates nicely the difference between the Social and Medical Models of disability of which the US appears (in my somewhat limited experience) to favour the Medical Model. The difference between the two is summed up nicely:
"In the medical model, disabled people are seen as the problem. They need to change and adapt to circumstances (if they can), and there is no suggestion that society needs to change. This model reflects the World Health Organization definition of disability. The social model has been developed by disabled people. In their view disability is caused by the barriers that exist within society and the way society is organised, which discriminates against people with impairments and excludes them from involvement and participation. This model reflects the Union of Physically Impaired Against Segregation (UPIAS) definition of disability."
The point being that it is society that disables me (as a wheelchair user), not my impairment.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
There appears to be a significant disparity between UK and US policing of this. In the UK we have Traffic Wardens who's sole job is to wander the streets making sure everyone abides by the local parking rules. The consequence of this is no police officer is taken away from 'more important' duties in order to issue a parking ticket..
As for who should qualify for the permit; surely it's as simple as - anyone who has a mobility impairment?
There is another question that this thread raises and that is the segregation that is imposed on people with impairments, not only imposed by society in general, but by disabled people, themselves.... I guess I've done too much philosophy!
On a side note, I'm pleased (maybe in a slightly twisted way) to see such a lengthy thread on the subject of disability. It's not often an Internet forum has so many people with an interest in disablity issues posting to it...
|
|
|
|
