Disabilties Studies DQ 6

Disability_Adulthood.PDF

Home >Social Science homework help >Disabilties Studies DQ 6

were sold to third-party investors, and these investments have lost value as the subprime mortgages have failed.

FRINGE BANKING

As many as 20% of residents in the United States have no regular banking arrangement and are instead served by lending institutions that charge high interest and market their services principally to the poor, to immigrants, and to racial minorities. These arrangements include pawn shops, title shops, rent-to-own, and payday loans. Pawn shops and title shops are somewhat similar to secured loans in that borrowers allow the lender to hold goods they own (anything of value for a pawn shop; a car title for the title shop) until the debt is repaid. Rent-to-own is superficially similar to ordinary consumer financing of household goods, except that the interest rates are much higher. Payday loans are a cash advance against a pay- check, and thus more similar to unsecured loans, again with a higher interest rate.

REASONS FOR THE INCREASE

IN DEBT IN THE UNITED STATES

An argument has been advanced that the current rise in debt results from a decline of the stigma attached to indebtedness, but the evidence for this hypothesis has not been compelling. An alternative hypothesis is that increased debt has risen as a result of consumer industries and the credit industry seeking to expand their markets. The profitable debt business has expanded to include even people who cannot readily repay, either through subprime lending or through the alternative fringe bank- ing institutions. This alternative hypothesis sees the increase in debt as a corollary of advanced capitalism. The advanced capitalism hypothesis typically sees stag- nant or declining real wages as an additional corollary to capitalism.

S E E A L S O Volume 2: Consumption, Adulthood and Later Life; Home Ownership/Housing; Income Inequality; Saving; Volume 3: Wealth.

B I B L I O G R A P H Y

Callis, R. R. & Cavanaugh, L.B. (2007, October 26). U.S. Census Bureau News. Retrieved June 26, 2008, from http:// www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/hvs/qtr307/ q307press.pdf

Draut, T. (2007). Strapped: Why America’s 20- and 30-somethings can’t get ahead. New York: Anchor Books.

Federal Reserve Statistical Release. G19, Consumer credit. Retrieved July 7, 2008, from http://www.federalreserve.gov/ releases/g19/hist/cc_hist_r.html

Kish, A. (2006, June). Perspectives on recent trends in consumer debt. Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia. Retrieved July 5, 2008, from http://www.philadelphiafed.org/pcc/papers/2006/ D2006JuneConsumerDebtCover.pdf

Mann, Ronald J. 2006. Charging ahead: The growth and regulation of payment card markets. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.

Manning, R. D. (2000). Credit card nation: The consequences of American’s addiction to credit. New York: Basic Books.

Foreclosure activity increases 8% in January. Retrieved July 7, 2008 from http://www.realtytrac.com

Sullivan, T. A., Thorne D., & Warren, E. (2001, September). Young, old, and in between: Who files for bankruptcy? Norton Bankruptcy Law Adviser, 1–11.

Sullivan, T. A., Warren, E., & Westbrook, J. L. (1995). Bankruptcy and the family. Marriage and Family Review, 21, 193–215.

Sullivan, T. A., Warren, E., & Westbrook, J. L. (2000). The fragile middle class: Americans in debt. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Warren, E., & Tyagi, A. (2004.) The two-income trap: Why middle-class mothers and fathers are going broke. New York: Basic Books.

Teresa A. Sullivan Deborah Thorne

DISABILITY, ADULTHOOD Disability can occur at any age and anyone, at any time, can enter the ranks of ‘‘the disabled.’’ Conditions such as blindness, deafness, mobility impairments, and mental retardation are commonly accepted (by the general pub- lic) as disabilities. However, in the United States, govern- ment definitions of disability include chronic illnesses such as diabetes and multiple sclerosis. Those with psy- chiatric disabilities, such as depression and mental ill- nesses, are also eligible for government disability services and benefits. Disabilities that are present at birth are termed congenital disabilities and the individual never develops an identity as a person without a disabil- ity. For individuals with congenital disabilities, disability is ‘‘normal.’’ In contrast, disabilities either acquired or diagnosed in adulthood presents challenges because adults are faced with the developmental tasks of marriage, establishing a home, developing a career, and financial independence. With an adult-onset disability, often the spouse or partner (of the person with a disability) is involved in responding to the disability. Functional losses may be considerable when an individual acquires a dis- ability in adulthood simply because these years are the period in which most individuals are at the peak of their professional lives.

The disability experience is unique to each person, even among individuals with the same type and severity of disability. The type of onset, the developmental stage

Disability, Adulthood

when the disability is acquired, the visibility of the dis- ability, the environmental resources available, and per- sonal characteristics and values specific to each individual make every disability experience different. Nonetheless, for purposes of organization and conceptualization, some sort of categorization is necessary. Categorization of dis- abilities is also necessary in order to provide government benefits and services to those who need them.

CATEGORIZATION

OF DISABILITIES

Two disability scholars (Smart, 2001, 2004, 2005 a, b; Vash, 1981) have categorized disabilities into three gen- eral types: physical disabilities, cognitive disabilities, and psychiatric disabilities. Physical disabilities include mobi- lity impairments, such as quadriplegia (paralysis in both upper and lower extremities) and paraplegia (paralysis in trunk and lower extremities) (Crewe & Krause, 2002); neurologic impairments such as cerebral palsy and seizure disorders (epilepsy); sensory loss (blindness, deafness, and deafness/blindness); musculoskeletal conditions such as muscular dystrophy and chronic illnesses or conditions such as heart disease, autoimmune diseases such as lupus, and the various types of diabetes. Many injuries, after medical stabilization, result in long term disabilities. Often, the general public considers physical disabilities to be the only type of disability. Cognitive disabilities include mental retardation, Down syndrome, develop- mental disabilities such as autism, and learning disabil- ities, such as dyslexia. Psychiatric disabilities include affective disorders such as depression, and mental ill- nesses such as schizophrenia, alcoholism, and chemical and substance abuse.

An individual may experience a single disability or a combination of two or three disabilities. For the purposes of service provision, one of the disabilities is designated as the primary disability. The three classifications are organ- ized by symptoms of disabilities, not by the cause (etiol- ogy). Often, the causes of disabilities are not known or understood, or there may be multiple causes. More important, the chief purpose of these categorizations is to devise treatment and service plans; therefore, the symptoms are of the greatest interest. Interestingly, there are known physical and organic causes for each type of disability and, therefore, if disabilities were categorized according to cause, all disabilities would be physical disabilities.

Categorization of disabilities also exerts a powerful influence on the degree of prejudice and discrimination directed toward people with disabilities and their fami- lies. Typically, those with physical disabilities experience the least degree of stigma and prejudice, probably because these types of disabilities are the easiest for the general

public to understand. Persons with cognitive disabilities are subjected to more prejudice and stigma than those with physical disabilities, and individuals with psychiatric disabilities have historically been the targets of the great- est degree of prejudice and discrimination. The history of the provision of government services and financial bene- fits in the United States closely parallels this categoriza- tion of disabilities. Those civilians with physical disabilities received services in 1920 (Vocational Rehabil- itation Act of 1920); those with cognitive disabilities received services in 1943 (Vocational Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1943); and those with psychiatric dis- abilities in 1965 (Vocational Rehabilitation Act Amend- ments of 1965). The history of government service provision illustrates that laws and policy are legalized and systematic expressions of public opinion.

RISING DISABILITY RATES

ARE ADVANCES FOR SOCIETY

Disability is both common and natural and, furthermore, a larger proportion of the population has disabilities than ever before. Experts expect that this proportion will con- tinue to increase. These rising rates of disability reflect an improvement in social conditions from both individual and societal perspectives because, in most cases, the alter- native to the acquisition of the disability would be the individual’s death. Innovations in neonatal medicine have allowed more babies to survive; but many are born with a disability. Likewise, advances in emergency med- icine have saved the lives of many accident victims; but these survivors often have a disability, such as a spinal cord injury or a traumatic brain injury. Advances in medicine have led to longer life spans and rate of dis- ability is positively correlated with age. For example, at present, there are more people who are blind in the United States than ever before due to the aging of the population. This is due to the higher rates of diabetes, sometimes a condition considered to be associated with old age. Medical progress also has increased the life spans of people with disabilities who, in the past, often did not survive to adulthood because of infections secondary to their disability.

The increase in the number of people with a dis- ability may also reflect a statistical artifact. In recent decades, social and medical scientists have developed more accurate and complete counting of people with disabilities. Further, the definition of disability has been broadened. For example, over the last 25 to 30 years, alcoholism, learning disabilities, and mental illness were not considered to be disabilities. Before these conditions were considered to be disabilities, no services or treat- ment were provided and, further, these conditions were

Disability, Adulthood

considered personal and moral failures, thus evoking a great deal of prejudice and discrimination.

THE INDIVIDUAL’S RESPONSE TO

DISABILITY

Most people with disabilities do not want to be viewed as tragic victims or heroes. Rather, they would like to be considered ordinary people. After their initial physical symptoms stabilize, people with disabilities do not view their disability as their primary identity; but they also understand that society often considers a disability to be the individual’s most important characteristic. (This view is captured in widely used phrases such as ‘‘the person is not the disability’’ or disability is not the ‘‘master sta- tus.’’) People with disabilities and their families do not deny the presence of the disability, nor do they fail to manage and make accommodations for the disability; they simply consider the many other identities, roles, and functions of an individual with a disability. Often, both people with disabilities and their families are proud of their mastery of the disability and experience satisfac- tion in negotiating life’s demands. Indeed, many people with disabilities consider societal lack of awareness and

prejudice to be more limiting and demanding than the disability.

Someone’s response to a disability is influenced by factors in the disability including the type and time of onset. Types of onset may be congenital (present at birth) or acquired. Other types of onset include sudden, trau- matic onsets, such as a stroke or an accident. In contrast, other onsets are slow and insidious, such as many types of mental illness or autoimmune diseases. The individual’s developmental stage at the time of onset may influence his or her responses. The individual with a congenital disability, such as cerebral palsy, has no identity or mem- ory of being a person without a disability. With a con- genital disability, it is the parents, siblings, and grandparents who must negotiate the stages of accept- ance. Conversely, someone in middle age, who has an established identity of success and achievement, will experience the onset of a disability very differently, con- sidering the losses to be substantial. Research has shown that older persons tend to accept disability better than do younger persons. Researchers have posited three reasons for this acceptance: The functional demands facing older adults, such as working or raising children, are decreased;

Disability Demonstration. Members of the Americans Disabled for Attendant Programs Today, (ADAPT) take part in a protest outside the White House to protest cuts in funding for community based services. AP IMAGES.

Disability, Adulthood

many of the individual’s age peers experience disability and, therefore disability seems normal, and people who are older typically have had a great deal of experi- ence and expertise in responding to life’s demands and the acquisition of a disability is simply thought to be another challenge. Interestingly, most, if not all, of the major developmental theories are silent on the issue of disability.

The course of a disability is the way in which the disability advances or progresses. There are three basic courses: stable, progressive, and episodic; each requires a different response from the individual. A stable course, such as would be expected with many types of blindness or spinal cord injury, presents fewer adjustment demands simply because the individual understands with what he or she is dealing. Progressive course disabilities (some- times referred to as chronic degenerative disorders) require adjustment and response at each level of loss. Often, this includes a change in self-identity. Disabilities

with an episodic course are probably the most difficult to deal with and the most stressful. Obviously, the individ- ual feels a loss of control because he or she cannot predict when an episode will occur.

Some disabilities are visible and others are invisible. Diabetes and some types of mental illness are considered invisible while paralysis and blindness are visible disabil- ities. Often, it is not the disability itself which is visible, but rather assistive technology such as hearing aids or a wheelchair. For example, although diabetes is considered an invisible disability, those who wear insulin pumps on their belts are considered to have a visible disability. The individual with an invisible disability will be required to consider issues of disclosure. In addition, research has shown that there is a great deal more prejudice and stigma directed toward those with invisible disabilities than those with visible disabilities. Although no correla- tion exists between degree of visibility and degree of impairment, if the individual wishes to receive accom- modations under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), he or she must disclose the disability. Disclosure of disability in social situations, including the timing of the disclosure, is fraught with difficulty. If the individual discloses early in the relationship, the friend, associate, or romantic partner may terminate the relationship. Disclo- sure late in a relationship may be perceived as a lack of trust and a betrayal.

Not all disabilities involve disfigurement, but those that do, such as amputations, burns, and facial bodily disfigurements, elicit a great deal of stigma. These types of disfigurements do not hinder their activities; but service providers regard disfigurements as limiting simply because of the prejudice and discrimination in the general society. Therefore, we can see that it is society’s prejudice, and nothing in the individual or the disability itself, which hinders the individual from full social integration. Obvi- ously, disfigurements acquired in adolescence can under- mine self-confidence in peer relationships and romantic and sexual partnerships.

People with disabilities must negotiate all of the developmental stages and, at the same time, respond to and manage both the disability and society’s prejudice and discrimination. Adults with disabilities tend to marry at the same rate as those without disabilities; however, the average age at which a person with a disability enters a first marriage is higher.

CURRENT TRENDS IN VIEWING

DISABILITY

Until very recently, the biomedical model of disability dominated definitions of disability, provision of services and treatment, the public’s conceptualization of disability, and the self-identity of people with disabilities. This model defines disability in the language of medicine, lending

A M E R I C A N S W I T H DISABILITIES ACT

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which was

signed into law in 1990, is the civil rights law for

people with disabilities. Much of its wording was taken

from the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The ADA has five main sections or titles, each

addressing a particular issue and each with different

enforcing bodies. Title I is Employment; Title II is

Transportation; Title III is Public Accommodations

and Services (restaurants, theaters, art galleries,

libraries, and so on); Title IV is Telecommunications;

and Title V is Miscellaneous and includes guidelines

for historical and wilderness sites.

The passage of the ADA in 1990 has facilitated the

access of people with disabilities into many aspects of

American life and has contributed to the collective

identity of people with disabilities. The act also has

spurred many advances in telecommunications,

assistive technology, and job restructuring.

Despite these accomplishments, some political

experts believe that the reforms have not produced

much change in the overall social position of Americans

with disabilities and that the gap between Americans

without disabilities and Americans with disabilities has

continued to grow.

Disability, Adulthood

scientific credibility to the idea that the cause and the management of the disability lie wholly within the indi- vidual, often called the personal tragedy of disability. Hold- ing the individual responsible is also referred to as the individualization and privatization of disability. Underly- ing this model are the assumptions that deficit and loss are present and that disabilities are objective conditions that exist in and of themselves. This objectification process opens the door to the possibility of dehumanization because attention is focused on the supposed pathology.

The biomedical model is relatively silent on issues of social justice and one’s interaction with the social and physical environment. This lack of awareness of society’s collective responsibility to provide accommodations is termed the medicalization of disability. Certainly in the biomedical model, the emphasis is on the rehabilitation of the individual, rather than society’s responsibility to provide accommodations to such people.

The biomedical model has a long history and, because of this, training in disability issues has been limited to medicine and other medically related fields. This is another example of the medicalization of disabil- ity. Furthermore, the history, values, and experiences of people with disabilities and their families have not been considered to be part of the general educational curricu- lum. Indeed, physicians have been the cultural translators of the disability experience. Rather than people with disabilities speaking and writing about the lived experi- ence of disability, it is medical personnel who have described and explained disability to the general public.

The sociopolitical model of disability calls for a radical shift in perspective as to the location of the definition of disability from being almost exclusively that of the indi- vidual to a collective responsibility as is, for example, communicated in Canadian law. The Canadian Bill of Human Rights of 1960 defines the legal rights of all Canadians and states that it is the responsibility of all Canadians to provide equal opportunities to Canadians with disabilities. The sociopolitical model is an interac- tional model because it takes into consideration both the person with the disability and that person’s unique sit- uation. In this model, policy makers, professional service providers, and the general public become part of the issue of disability or stated differently, if disability is a collec- tive concern, then the response is a collective responsi- bility. This model defines disability as a social and civil construction because there is nothing inherent in a dis- ability that warrants prejudices or stereotypes and that reduces opportunity. The sociopolitical model has been called the minority group model and has fostered the involvement of many people with disabilities in advocacy movements such as the independent living movement and the disability rights movement. Given that the socio- political model considers disability a collective concern,

advocates view disability studies and disability history as integral components of sociology, psychology, political science, and history curriculums.

S E E A L S O Volume 3: Assistive Technologies; Sensory Impairments.

B I B L I O G R A P H Y

Akabas, S. H. (2000). Practice in the world of work. In P. Allen- Meares & C. Garvin (Eds.), The Handbook of Social Work Direct Practice (pp. 499–517). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Albrecht, G. L. (Ed.). (1981). Cross national rehabilitation policies: A sociological perspective. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq. Batavia, A. I., & Shriner, K. (2001). The Americans with

Disabilities Act as an engine of social change: Models of disability and the potential of a civil rights approach. Disability Policy Studies Journal, 29, 690–702.

Becker, G. S. (1999). Are we hurting or helping the disabled? Business Week 3635, 9.

Bickenbach, J. E. (1993). Physical disability and social policy. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto.

Bluestone, H. H., Stokes, A., & Kuba, A. (1996). Toward an integrated program design: Evaluating the status of diversity training in a graduate school curriculum. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 27, 394–400.

Charlton, J. I. (1998). Nothing about us without us: Disability oppression and empowerment. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Conrad, P. (2004). The discovery of hyperkinesis: Notes on the medicalization of deviant behavior. In S. Danforth & S. D. Taff (Eds.), Crucial readings in special education (pp. 18–24). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson-Merrill, Prentice Hall.

Crewe, N. M., & Krause, J. S. (2002). Spinal cord injuries. In M. G. Brodwin, F. Tellez, & S. K. Brodwin (Eds.), Medical, psychosocial, and vocational aspects of disability (2nd ed., pp. 279–291). Athens, GA: Elliott & Fitzpatrick.

Dart, J. (1993). Introduction: The ADA: A promise to be kept. In L. O. Gostin & H. A. Beyer (Eds.), Implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act (p. xxii). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Davis, L. J. (Ed.). (1997). The disability studies reader. New York: Routledge.

DeJong, G., & Batavia, A. I. (1990). The Americans with Disabilities Act and the current state of U.S. disability policy. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 1, 65–75.

Fleischer, D. Z., & Zames, F. (2001). The disability rights movement: From charity to confrontation. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University.

Fries, K. (Ed.) (1997). Staring back: The disability experience from the inside out. New York: Plume.

Hahn, H. (1997). Advertising the acceptable employment image: Disability and capitalism. In L. J. Davis (Ed.), The disability reader (pp. 172–186). New York: Praeger.

Hahn, H. (2005). Academic debates and political advocacy: The U.S. disability movement. In G. E. May & M.B. Raske (Eds.), Ending disability discrimination: Strategies for social workers (pp. 1–24). Boston: Pearson.

Harris, L. (1994). The ICD III: Employing disabled Americans. New York: Louis Harris.

Disability, Adulthood

Linton, S. (1998). Claiming disability: Knowledge and identity. New York: New York University.

Longmore, P. K. (1995). Medical decision making and people with disabilities: A clash of cultures. Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics, 23, 82–87.

May, G. E., & Raske, M.B. (Eds.) (2005). Ending disability discrimination: Strategies for social workers. Boston: Pearson.

Olkin, R., & Pledger, C. (2003). Can disability studies and psychology join hands? American Psychologist, 58, 296–298.

Rossides, D. W. (1990). Social stratification: The American class system in comparative perspective. (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Scotch, R., & Shriner, K. (1997). Disability as human variation: Implications for policy. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 549, 148–160.

Smart, J. F. (2001). Disability, society, and the individual. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.

Smart, J. F. (2004). Models of disability: The juxtaposition of biology and social construction. In T. F. Riggar & D. R. Maki (Eds.), Handbook of rehabilitation counseling (pp. 25– 49). New York: Springer.

Smart, J. F. (2005). Challenges to the Biomedical Model of Disability: Changes in the practice of rehabilitation counseling. Directions in Rehabilitation Counseling, 16, 33–43.

Smart, J. F. (2005). The promise of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). Rehabilitation Education, 19, 191–199.

Smart, J. F. (2008). Disability, society, and the individual. (2nd ed.) Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.

Stefan, S. (2001). Unequal rights: Discrimination against people with mental disabilities and the Americans with Disabilities Act. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.

Thomson, R. G. (1997). Integrating disability studies into the existing curriculum. In L. J. Davis (Ed.), The disability studies reader (pp. 295–306). New York: Routledge.

Vash, C. L. (1981). The psychology of disability. New York: Springer. Vocational Rehabilitation Act of 1920, 41 Stat. 374. Vocational Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1943, 68 Sta. 652. Vocational Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1965, 79 Stat. 1282.

Julie Smart

DISCRIMINATION, WORKPLACE S E E Volume 2: Racism/Race Discrimination; Sexism/Sex

Discrimination; Ageism/Age Discrimination.

DIVORCE AND SEPARATION Individuals rarely enter into serious relationships, espe- cially marriage, with thoughts about how the relationship

might end. However, the prevalence of divorce and sep- aration ensures that virtually everyone will have some experience with relationships ending in this manner either personally or by observing others. Most social scientists agree that divorce and separation represent points in a process of marital breakdown rather than isolated events. Therefore, for the purpose of this entry, divorce is defined as the legal termination of marriage and is discussed within the context of a series of events, of which separation may be a part. Separation refers to the point in a relationship when spouses choose to live apart due to problems in the marriage. The term marital dis- solution is used to describe the overall process of marital breakdown. The legal status awarded to marital unions sets these relationships apart from dating, cohabiting, and same-sex couples, and, consequently, the processes and implications of relationship dissolution are also some- what different. Although much of what is said here may apply to these other relationship forms, the primary focus of this entry is married, heterosexual couples.

THE PREVALENCE OF DIVORCE:

PATTERNS AND TRENDS

The fact that divorce and separation are frequent experi- ences in contemporary U.S. society is widely accepted. The most commonly cited statistic is that about 50% of marriages will end in divorce, with other estimates as low as 44% or as high as 64%. One could easily wonder which number is the most accurate and why there is such variability in reports. A few considerations are important in determining the most accurate statistic. First, does the number refer to all marriages or only to marriages that were begun in a certain year? Second, are first marriages the focus or does the number include remarriages? Third, is the intent to describe the entire adult population or a specific subpopulation (e.g., race or age group) only?

One way demographers calculate the divorce rate is by documenting the number of divorces per 1,000 married women age 15 and above for a given year, using data from the census or from marriage and divorce records (Cherlin, 1992). As of 2008, this figure hovers around 20%, or 200 divorces per 1,000 married women in a year. Another way to determine the divorce rate is to estimate the percentage of first marriages begun in a particular year that will end in divorce at some point during the couples’ lifetimes—this is the source of the 50% figure so often cited. Individuals who are in their second or later marriages are more likely to divorce than are those in first marriages; about 60% of remarriages end in divorce. Rates also differ by race and ethnicity such that Hispanics have the lowest rates of divorce, followed by Whites, whereas Blacks have the highest rates.

Discrimination, Workplace