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

To be fair I reported a poster who said that it was better for a disabled person to wet themselves on the pavement than on a bus and that was duly deleted.

What I think MNHQ does not get is that every time I brave AIBU or (sometimes) chat and see a thread title like 'AIBU to use this disabled space' I feel less welcome on MN. Because the answer is obvious. The question does NOT need to be asked. It really doesn't. The Ops know what the answer is but don't give a shit. It creates an atmosphere of disablism, regardless of what individual posters say.

I thought I had left. But am just very angry and sad now and can't seem to shut up.

please don't go.madmouse you will be missed

madmouse don't you find though that the majority of mumsnet would jump on an AIBU like that you have just mentioned, or that dreadful comment you reported?

Don't go - keep talking.

@MrsMuddyPuddles

MNHQ it would be very helpful if you could spell out what you do and do not consider disablist.

Well, what we'd class as disablist are discriminatory or abusive posts, expressing the belief that disabled people are inferior to others.

But, as ever, we'd welcome input from all Mumsnetters on this.

So a thread about a wheelchair user not needing a space as much as a mum with a buggy would be assuming the wheelchair user was inferior to said mother would it not?

Madmouse stay you will be missed.

Is it the same people who keep on posting the comments.
If it is,and you can remember who,send a list to MNHQ
You should not have to repeatedly battle against this.
I am not sure which MN rules these posters will have broken,by doing the same thing repeatedly.
If they havent broken any MN rules,then MN needs to make a new one.
There is no reason that MN cannot cope with this situation.
And if that means MN has to make a brand new rule than so be it.
And it should be named the madmouse rule,if you agree!

Badvoc judging by all the bus threads it would sadly appear that way.

can I politely suggest mn hq read the (i think it is 4) threads about wheelchairs on buses.
bet they would have ot delete a lot of posts as being disablist

I know dotty.
Just making a point to mnhq as as far as I know that thread is still active.
Funny that.
(except its not)

I think mnhq need to urgently reassess their stance on this issue.
There is no other area of MN where posts that break the talk guidelines are let get away with it.
Oh! I forgot! It's because we are here to educate!
Really must stop.
The red mist is descending again!

I have been trying to stay away from this thread and others that have been making me far too upset and angry. I have returned to see that MNHQ are still wiggling on the hook and seemingly unwilling to tackle this problem properly. :(

Madmouse, your DS is so very lovely. :)

landofsoapandglory, madmouse and everyone else on here is so right when they say that there is such a great deal of ignorance in society about disabilism. I have so much admiration for the posters on here who are carers. I hope you will not mind me sharing my story as well.

I am not a full-time carer, but I have worked as a carer for a disabled person in the past, and I will be doing this again in the future when I eventually return to work after the arrival of DC2! I have a younger brother and cousin, both with a range of learning difficulties and disabilities. I also have two friends with disabilities, one who has always been disabled, the other was involved in a traffic accident which has left her with disabilities. I also have an older cousin who has competed in three Paralympic games, winning two medals. :)

I have grown-up around people with disabilities and have seen for myself the crap that has been thrown at them by society over the years, and it is a very emotive subject for those of us who see people we love, people who are absolutely wonderful, but who have to face the ignorance that exists in our society through no fault of their own.

It makes me so furious that this can continue to be allowed both on Mumsnet and in society as a whole.

But what about Sharklet's idea? I think it's a great one - why can we not have this?

"Here is an idea. I belong to another online forum where inevitably the same misguided questions will be asked again and again (completely different subject matter) and rather than leave it for the same old twaddle to come out again and again, and rather than simply ignore the fact that this OP is wrong and could do with educating... the moderators have come up with a selection of FAQs that use quotes and info from former threads on the subject, as well as backing them up with access to either law or guidance on the subject from particular bodies. This allows the moderators to link to this, and close the thread to further comment. Allowing it not to inflame people who are simply sick of preaching the same rhetoric over and over, and avoiding more ignorant and misguided comments / questions those who are simply unaware of the truth of the matter."

Madmouse, I hope you stay.

I think MNHQ are looking too crudely for evidence of direct discrimination. ('Disabled people are inferior.') A lot of the truly awful and hurtful comments on MN about people with disabilities drip with sarcastic or disingenuous indirect discrimination, or are quite simply indulging in goading ('Why do disabled people .... ')

I can see it, and others can see it; but maybe MNHQ can't see it because they are only looking to tick off examples of direct discrimination?

'So a thread about a wheelchair user not needing a space as much as a mum with a buggy would be assuming the wheelchair user was inferior to said mother would it not?'

I don't think prioritising 'need' is the same as saying one person is inferior to another tbh.

Comparing one specific wheelchair user with one specific mother with buggy is not discriminatory, it's when the comments are generalised.

I will 3rd or 4th Sharklets idea.

Sorry, 2shoes, they're too busy battering on silly threads

Thank you for your reply, HelenMN. I'll need to think about this as it touches on issues I haven't really been involved in before, but it leads a bad taste in my mouth as being too wishy-washy and open to interpretation.

Can I suggest that hq form a succinct policy and train all staff? Twice now I've reported something regarding a mental health condition being "not real", gotten a form letter "we allow bad taste to stand", challenged it (usually through asking for clarification) only to see hq make a u-turn and realize that, actually, it went beyond taste and into discrimination.

I simply don't know enough about disabled person's rights to be able to say what I find wrong with your definition, except by analogy to feminism. You know the old quote "I'm a feminist because I think women are person, too"? Well, replace "women" with the disabled. And when someone says "I'm going to use something reserved by law for others and I won't stop even if they need it", I find that discriminatory, and feel it's very sad that you don't.

I wonder if the lack of deletions it partly due to mn hq's softer approach.
I reported a PA the other day and this was mentioned.
don't really know why they are now taking a softer approach.

Hear hear MrsMuddyPuddles re: the legalities.

When I read the wheelchair space on the bus thread I came away with the overall impression that it was the bus companies who are to blame. Surely with all the design talent in this country it should be possible to have busses that will accommodate a good number of spaces that could be used by wheelchairs, mothers with small children in buggies and, if not required, by other passengers?

It is clear there is - without wanting to say anything hurtful or unkind - a bit of a public backlash against certain sectors of the population who receive support on the basis of assessed disabiliities. These things need to be out in the open and be discussed - censorship of polite comment on the basis you disagree with it is not something society can tolerate.

In lots of areas of Mumsnet there is robust discussion that can offend - I'm always rather put out by the anti-dog faction and the constant lambasting of private education and our present government but we all need to be free to say what we think, except in very exceptional circumstances.

oh please don't turn this into yet another thread about buses, you have 4 threads to say how hard done by people with buggys are.
this one imo is not about buses, it is about sick attitudes that are allowed to stand on mn.

higgle dogs and the other things you mention are life style choices
being disabled or having a disabled child is not a choice.

Higgle the point on that was it was disabled people who campaigned for many years for it not mothers who can lift a child onto knee as many generations including me have done in the past. Not a problem if its not being used by a disabled passenger but common decency has dissapeared nowadays it would appear. But this isn't what this thread is about its about the general second class citizen attitude on mn to disabled people.

I dont agree higgle that "we all need to be free to say what we think,except in very exceptional circumstances".
Why should we?
Why should we have the liberty to go round upsetting people over and over again?

It sounds like you are happy about this.

I questioned another poster on this a few months ago.
I said that,well i will come to your kids and say all sorts of stuff to them,because thats ok,because you believe in freedom of speech, except in exceptional circumstances.And asked them if they would just ignore me doing that.She said no,she would come and give me an earful back,but I was ok to do that in the name of freedom of speech.
So I will ask you the same question.
Shall i go round to your house and yell at your kids,or perhaps your dog,or quite frankly,whatever and whoever takes my fancy?

And no,I dont actually know where you live.

higgle, I don't think there is a public backlash against 'certain sectors of the population at all'.

I think what there is, is a small minority of unethical journalists who want to sell papers and a small minority of berks on MN who think that goading is cute.

Claiming not to understand the needs of disabled people does become discrimination, I think, when it is relentless, wittingly dense and unnecessarily repetitive.