Question

In the article, "This is What we Think," the authors specifically mention a few things which they feel perpetuate discrimination. These include:

Using diagnosis to segregate those with disabilities from others

Presenting information in written text formats only

Using labels to describe those with disabilities

Denying services and support on the basis of funding

They also discuss how they feel it's unfair that non-disabled people are "allowed" to behave poorly, but they are not.

They specifically mention that they are forced to "rush" and that this is detrimental to their success.

Now that we've had a chance to process this in light of media, education, and from a legal standpoint, please choose a point or two and discuss whether or not you think that these are realistic goals for society. How do we qualify supports without diagnosis/eligibility labels? Do we have to "sort" the "disabled from the non-disabled" in order to determine who needs help and who is "just a freeloader?" What are educational and medical records without descriptive labels? How do we financially support others without patronizing or infantilizing them? If we are paying the bills, do we get to set the rules? Do we have a right to decline services because we can't afford them? How do we pay for the support of others when many of us are struggling to pay our own bills? When time is money and there are too many requirements already jammed into a too-short day, how much extra time can we carve out to accommodate someone else? Exactly how are we supposed to present ALL text visually and/or with auditory recordings?  

Do you feel that these accommodations are realistic? Can we afford them? What is reasonable? Is disability an individual/family obligation or a societal one? Does societal obligation only extend so far? How far?