National Disability Leadership Alliance

Letter to President Obama from NDLA

Dear President Obama,

National Disability Leadership Alliance is extremely concerned about and offended by your rhetoric regarding people with disabilities and how we relate to gun violence during your January 5th speech.  Bringing mental illness and psychiatric disabilities into a conversation about gun violence and mass shootings only serves to further dangerous, ableist myths that individuals with disabilities are responsible for such violence. This is simply not the case. Just because an action is unthinkable, that does not mean that it is a result of disability.

After referring to perpetrators of gun violence as “violent and dangerous people,” “violent criminals,” and “evil,” you then listed investing money into mental health programs as a step to prevent future gun violence. As a result, you led your worldwide audience to conclude that individuals with mental health or psychiatric disabilities are violent, dangerous, evil criminals. But just as you stated that in America “We are not inherently more prone to violence,” the same is true for people with disabilities. We are not inherently more prone to gun violence, and to insinuate that we are only perpetuates ableist stereotypes.

While you stated that you want to “continue to de-stigmatize mental health issues,” your plan only serves to further stigmatize us as dangerous perpetrators of gun violence, despite considerable scientific evidence that finds no link between mental health and violence.

Furthermore, Whitehouse.gov states that “[t]he Department of Health and Human Services is finalizing a rule to remove unnecessary legal barriers preventing States from reporting relevant information about people prohibited from possessing a gun for specific mental health reasons.” What your Administration refers to as “unnecessary legal barriers,” is actually our fundamental right to privacy. We are citizens of this country and entitled to the same rights as all other citizens. Your plan to invade the health records of individuals with disabilities is simply a violation of our rights.

Lastly, using records from the Social Security Administration to deem individuals with representative payees as incompetent to assert their rights is a far stretch and sets a dangerous precedent. Needing assistance in handing finances is not an indication that an individual is violent or dangerous. Taking away this Constitutional right from individuals with representative payees may help to pave the way to take away other rights, including our rights to marry, raise our children, and vote.

We call upon you to change your rhetoric on gun violence and people with disabilities, find real solutions to gun violence that do not use the Disability Community as a scapegoat, and apologize to the Disability Community for spreading these dangerous stereotypes about our people.

Sincerely,

National Disability Leadership Alliance
National Coalition for Mental Health Recovery
National Council on Independent Living
ADAPT
Little People of America
National Organization of Nurses with Disabilities
National Association of the Deaf
Association of Programs for Rural Independent Living 
Autistic Self Advocacy Network
United Spinal Association
Not Dead Yet

A Real Disability Issue, But is Anyone Listening?

Andrew PBy This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Disability & Politics

Let’s take a moment and give due credit to John Kasich.

Unless something very weird happens in the next several months, he’s not going to be the next President of the United States. But Governor Kasich is the only candidate of either party so far in this cycle to bring up a bona fide, not accidental, not quippy-insulting disability issue in a televised debate. He’s done it twice now.

Kasich: The Unlikely Hero of Debate Seven

Emily MunsonBy This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Disability & Politics

Thursday night's debate, presented by Fox News and Google, gave Republican candidates their last opportunity to face off before the Iowa Caucuses. Both the main-stage moderators and debaters – Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, John Kasich, and Rand Paul – began with jokes about the biggest “elephant not in the room”: Donald Trump. Yet his silence permitted viewers to listen to the nuanced differences of opinion among the other candidates. This debate was not about who could drop the biggest bomb, whether from his arsenal or from his lips, but about who could best position Americans to thrive.

Shoot For The Moon, Or Play It Safe? - The Fourth Democratic Presidential Debate

Andrew PBy This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Disability & Politics

Sunday night’s Democratic debate went a long way towards clarifying the choice ahead for Democrats, at least between the two frontrunners. Once again, none of the candidates said anything intentional about disability policy … apart from the apparently bipartisan drawing of false connections between gun violence and mental health. Still, disabled voters should find the some of the choices being put to Democrats very familiar.

 

Democratic Debate #4: Sanders and Clinton Clash on Healthcare

Emily MunsonBy This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Disability & Politics

Sunday! Sunday! Sunday! No, not a monster truck rally, but something almost as brutal and smashing. Last Sunday provided Democratic presidential candidate front runners Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders the platform to differentiate their positions on those issues most important to their base. (Martin O'Malley was there, too, but barely; one was reminded of his presence only through his plaintive pleas for speaking time.)

Blowing on Spark: The Sixth Republican Presidential Debate

Andrew PBy This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Disability & Politics

It kind of snuck up on me, but the sixth Republican Presidential Debate had more in it about disability than any of the debates of either party so far. That’s not saying much, since I’ve heard very little about disability so far, but it’s an improvement. And though most of what the candidates said about disability didn’t impress, the variety of angles on disability displayed in this debate was encouraging.

Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, Chris Christie, Jeb Bush, and John Kasich squared off in this round, and it got nasty. They beat the heck out of Democrat Hillary Clinton, took a few swipes at Bernie Sanders, and smacked each other around a good deal as well. If you want an analysis of the whole debate, I recommend this USA Today / FactCheck.org article, and this analysis by Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight.com. As usual, I won’t go over the debate point by point. Instead, I want to look at how disability cropped up, directly and indirectly, and what that might mean to voters with disabilities.

Passing A Low Bar: Hillary Clinton answers a Question about Disability

Andrew PBy This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Disability & Politics

A boy attending a recent Town Hall Meeting in Portsmouth, New Hampshire asked Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton a question about disability. On a scale of 1 to 10 … 10 being the absolute ideal combination of policy specifics, respectful choice of words, and positive but unsentimental body language … I give Clinton’s answer a 6.

First, let’s look at the question …

Page 1 of 5

  • «
  •  Start 
  •  Prev 
  •  1 
  •  2 
  •  3 
  •  4 
  •  5 
  •  Next 
  •  End 
  • »