Madmouse's open letter to MNHQ about the treatment of those with disabilities on MN

[madmouse]

Dear MNHQ

I joined MN when I was pregnant with my lovely ds. That heady autumn with bump before such words as NICU, neonatal seizures, brain damage, cerebral palsy, speech delay, special school entered my vocabulary.

That was 5 whole years ago - and all that time MN has been a part of my life. Got a lot of support from my ante- and postnatal buddies and from experienced SN mums. Gave back where I could. Became ill with PTSD, found the MH threads, recovered, started to give support on the MH threads.

Now I've come to the point that the only thing stopping me from leaving MN is that I would let down people on the MH threads. Other than that your (MNHQ) behaviour today has been an eye opener and a bit of a final straw.

MN has become, like RL, a place where disabled people and people with disabled children are not safe, not treated equally and not extended the same courtesy and respect as those without disabilities.

What happened today is just a tip of the ice berg. Day in day out threads appear with the same old theme. AIBU to use this disabled space because my baby's maxi cosy is too big and the P&T spaces are full, AIBU to use the wheelchair space on the bus (those two appear weekly by and large), AIBU to think it's nice to be disabled because you get lots of benefits, AIBU to think disabled people have it easy, AIBU to think I should have a free car too seeing as that I pay taxes.

It goes on and on and on. And none of it is ever challenged other than by a small group of us who do all this fighting in RL too - because it affects us and our children.

There is such thing as discrimination. And you do have a duty to stamp it out. Hand off moderation is no excuse certainly seeing how quick you were to delete 2shoes thread when some of us started fighting back against the endless threads of threads which in turn are copies of last week's threads.

I am very disappointed. And I think you have some thinking to do.

Best wishes

You see those personal attacks on the disabled are worded just so, so they don't break talk guidelines, made by prolific posters who know what they can get away with.

So is there going to be short term bans for repeat disablists?

@Badvoc

Sigh. You say that you are "proud"of the sn/sen section on MN" We are not here to make you or anyone else proud Helen, not even MN. We are here to try and forge a place - albeit a virtual one - that is safe for us. Where people understand, where we can share advice, tips and info. where we can laugh at things others would deem unfunny I.e. our struggles with our kids sn/sen and others reaction to it. We are not here to "educate" the ignorant and bigoted. Sorry. Do you tell other section users (like the stately homes thread) that offensive posts are let stand so that others can be "educated" about childhood abuse? I don't think so. Does that answer your question?

We do completely understand that you don't want to feel that it's your place to educate the ignorant and bigoted. And we agree that it's not your place to, either. And apologise for past communications from us that made sound as though it should be - no one should be getting that kind of mail from us any more.

However, MN is a place that doesn't censor or pre-censor debate. We believe that, through reasoned, civil debate, attitudes can change. Which means we do, at least initially, allow uncomfortable and even offensive opinions - on all sorts of topics - to stand (unless they break our guidelines).

That said, we realise, as we've said here earlier, that we could do more in these instances to post on the threads and let everyone know where we're coming from - and what we absolutely won't tolerate. We think it would be helpful, from now on, to spell out our thinking on the boards for all to see, not just in mails to those who've reported.

SillyPhase no, of course there won't.
HQ want to keep those posters.
Those who have left in the past (including me), those who are considering their membership now.... we don't matter.

HQ have made it absolutely clear that we will be treated differently and that we matter less.

I'm only here to support and maintain links with friends I've made here. That's it. I'm fully aware that MN is hostile for people with disabilities and their carers. Which is really sad.

@ASillyPhaseIAmGoingThrough

You see those personal attacks on the disabled are worded just so, so they don't break talk guidelines, made by prolific posters who know what they can get away with.

So is there going to be short term bans for repeat disablists?

Yes, as we said earlier, if we notice (or are tipped off) that a poster is persistently attacking the disabled but perhaps flying below the guidelines radar, we would definitely take action.

OP, I don't think I have evr seen anyone on mumsnet say that they would use a disabled space because their Maxi-cosi is too big! Really, do people make a habit of saying things like that? Really?

@Glitterknickaz

SillyPhase no, of course there won't. HQ want to keep those posters. Those who have left in the past (including me), those who are considering their membership now.... we don't matter.

HQ have made it absolutely clear that we will be treated differently and that we matter less.

I'm only here to support and maintain links with friends I've made here. That's it. I'm fully aware that MN is hostile for people with disabilities and their carers. Which is really sad.

We're sorry to read this, Glitterknickaz. Where have we made it clear that we will treat you differently and that you matter less?

@HelenMumsnet

[quote ASillyPhaseIAmGoingThrough] Last I saw the post I reported still stands.

I haven't seen your report, ASillyPhase, but I will go and have a look and see where it is in our inbox.[/quote]

OK, have found it. You have mail, ASillyPhase

By telling us that posts we actively find offensive and disablist should stand for education purposes.

Things that directly involve our children being sneered at allowed to stay for purposes of debate....

It wouldn't happen to ethnic minorities, or persons of certain religion, sexuality or race yet it does to our families.

It's openly condoned in the name of debate.

So some posters' right to post inflammatory, offensive and borderline illegal bile overrides our rights to be treated with equality.

DuellingFanjo - oh yes, on here, and in real life.

HelenMHNQ I would just really really like to see something positive from MNHQ to show that a) disabled people are a full part of society and b) disabled people are a full part of MN.

And please do not talk about the SN boards. I don't go on the SN boards, like many I've been scalded there too. And it just sounds like we should stay in our corner and be nice.

It's when I come out to play and have some harmless fun on AIBU arguing over dog shit and bad parenting and unreasonable MILs that I get confronted with an attitude that suggests that my ds is not really welcome in society.

@Glitterknickaz

By telling us that posts we actively find offensive and disablist should stand for education purposes.

Things that directly involve our children being sneered at allowed to stay for purposes of debate....

It wouldn't happen to ethnic minorities, or persons of certain religion, sexuality or race yet it does to our families.

It's openly condoned in the name of debate.

So some posters' right to post inflammatory, offensive and borderline illegal bile overrides our rights to be treated with equality.

OK. Thanks for your reply.

As posted below, no one should be being told any longer that posts you find offensive should stand for education purposes. We acknowledge that we did often say this in the past but we've been educated!

Inflammatory posts, illegal posts, sneering-at-children posts - those should all be deleted as soon as we're made aware of them with, as we said earlier, no debate, discussion or mitigating pleas.

Where there is a muddy, grey, uncomfortable area is where a post might be offensive but not deliberately so - ie not inflammatory/goading but ignorant. That is where we think it's right to judge each post individually and in context, rather than just have a policy of blanket deletion.

This is, of course, tricky and we may not get it right every time, and you may not agree with us every time. But our intent is very much to be consistent and fair across all sensitive topics, from disability to religion. We don't have a different yardstick for disablist posts, if that's what you mean.

We obviously haven't done a great job at communicating this to you, though. We will take that on board and pull our socks up - both in our mails to those who report, and in our posts on the boards.

"What we would delete is a thread saying 'should BME people be allowed to use public transport?' -and we would delete that thread if you substituted 'people with SN' for 'BME people'."

When you allow threads to stand that read that it is ok to take over the space provided for a wheelchair user, you are saying that people with SN should not being allowed on public transport.

Xp with HelenMumsnet! Looks like hq are starting to understand :)

Thanks Helen. I haven't looked at my mail, I see the post was deleted. It seems op, a change has occurred.

They have not,and will not change their basic ethos.
I am no good at linking.
Put in the search at the top campaign for libel law reform.

As I read and understand it,MN just want to be "innocent facilitators".
They dont want to have to intervene with posts at all.

Hi MNHQ, I posted a couple of times on the first thread.

First, I just want to acknowledge again what a rubbish time people with disabilities have.

I do think, though, that the original thread was debating a genuine question about a genuinely grey area of the law. While I understand why some posters take a very black and white moral view on the topic, the law is less clear and the vast majority of posters supporting the OP's unusual circumstances were not discriminatory in the legal sense so it would be worrying if they were moderated. If anything, where posts were bordering on being discriminatory, they were reasonably evenly scattered IMO between discrimination against people with disabilities and against babies (age) and mothers.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I support MNs light touch approach. Prejudiced posters quickly identify themselves anyway, while everyone else should be free to debate what is a debatable issue.

And, if you are going to have a campaign, please think about making it a campaign to make buses more accessible for all, rather than pitting one minority group against another. People with disabilities have a right to use public transport safely. Young children also have a right to use it safely - in this day and age, babies should not be expected to travel unsecured, held on someone's knee. There needs to be a lot more space and straps on buses so that both groups can travel safely and in comfort as and when they want.

madmouse I am so sorry that I offended you and others. I have always been of the opinion that a buggy should be folded for a wheelchair user and have said as much on many threads in the past. I think the attitude some have of seeing things that disabled people have/do to make their lives tolerable, or easier, or independant as 'perks' is disgraceful.

But my thread was started out of a genuine wondering. I would always want a buggy to fold to make room on a bus for a wheelchair user. But I was honestly wondering what the official position was, if any, about people disembarking to make room for a wheelchair user.

I was under the impression that the wheelchair space was to accommodate a wheelchair user, not a legal right to the space if it was already occupied, but was willing to be informed otherwise. However nobody seemed to know and it became an argument about people using disabled facilities. It was a genuine question with no offence meant. When people just popped on to be offended rather than actually telling me the legal stance, or to tell me that I was morally evil and ignorant about disability, I gave up.

The thread was deleted and I don't know what happened on it. So I am sorry to anyone who was offended by the thread, and maybe it was because it had been done to death and people were sick of arguing about it, but I still do not feel I was being 'disablist', just looking for an answer. (And I know many of you feel that you gave your answer by saying 'It is a wheelchair space, end of', but that did not really answer my question)

As many of you have said, your place is not to educate. But if someone is not being disablist and has a query, people answering it with sensitivity and facts can be helpful and informative and could make society a better place.

Well I have reported a few posts I feel were Disablist, I await a responce to see the result.

This is the problem, nobody has told me the legalities of it!

I don't want to get into this again, but if I had somewhere important to be (eg hospital appt) and getting off would make me miss it and I did not legally have to get off, no. If I could afford to be late, or of another bus would be along shortly, or if I could walk the remainder of my journey, yes. If that makes me a bitch, so be it.

I would assume that if everyone thought this was, there would always be a space vacated if it was needed, as it would be unlikely that everyone on a bus needed to be somewhere urgently. So I was not looking for 'what should or would you do', more 'what are the rules around wheelchair spaces'.

I didn't know if people legally had to vacate for wheelchair users or if the seats were like the 'please give to the elderly/people with young children seats' where they were to accommodate people but nobody would be expected to get off a full bus for an elderly person, although obviously it would be a kind gesture.

Anyway, I am not going to argue this again because this is not what this thread is for. I just wanted to say that some of us were looking for actual answers, not trying to antagonise, and being made out to be a bitch is not helpful.

I don't know exact law, as has been explained, weelchair users don't have the choices you listed you have. There are laws for equally and laws for disability discrimination anyone can Google.