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

Fallen that's too harsh. No my ds doesn't need pity and neither do I, but strawberry is rightly counting her blessings.

I have said it before,and I will say it again.MN exists to make money.They want as many posters as possible on here.So if things are controversial,that means more people spending time on MN.
If however,people started to choose to sue them,then they take real notice,as that affects their business,adverttisers,and therefore money.

Maybe when trying to decide whether a post is disablist or not, MNHQ should replace the disabled person in the scenario with someone from a different minority (eg a racial or religious minority) and if it is considered discrimatory then, it needs to be deleted.

This may help MNHQ to see the disabilism that is currently accepted on MN.

I support you Madmouse. I had a look at that bus thread and in my opinion it isn't a true reflection of society. It is not a nice or helpful thread and really in my humble opinion as being new to Mumsnet really doesn't show it in a very good light. Sorry if that is too outspoken.

My thoughts exactly cake

I am a relative newcomer to the site and it is the first time I have seen one of these debates (although I get the impression this is a regular topic). I initially read the second thread about the bus tonight. I read the OP and thought that, yes, it sounded reasonable that the woman with the pushchair stayed on the bus.
I have subsequently read this thread and realised how much of a misconception and misunderstanding of the situation that was. I just wanted to post to let both you and MNHQ know that there is one user here who has GENUINELY been educated tonight. It is a disabled space for a disabled person. Prior to reading this thread I would not have thought that and would have been inclined to stay on the bus.

I can see how frustrating it is for some of you who have been longstanding campaigners for the rights of those with disabilities. I can understand how difficult it must be to feel that you have to keep having this debate. I just wanted to say, please keep having the debate. It has been and is genuinely changing opinions and I think MNHQ has done the right thing in leaving the thread intact.

That's a lovely post Maisie thank you!

But...I don't want to be a campaigner. I'm a mother of a ds with cerebral palsy. I want the best for him and I really don't see why I should have to fight so much harder for that than those whose children are able bodied.

"MNHQ:
Over the years, we've seen countless posts by MNers that show how far our members are informed by the experience of reading these threads."

But if we want to inform people we can start threads talking about people with disabilities ourselves if we wish.

Reading misconceptions - and prejudices- is very different and unnecessary imo.

And I do think it should be up to us to say " oh please let that post stand, despite the prejudice, because we want to debate the issue, we feel the benefit outweighs the distress of the prejudice." And no-one is saying that here, that I can see, they are saying the opposite.

We don't argue with prejudice on a thread because of a desire to educate, we argue to refute it, because the post is there, and HQ are letting it stand so someone has to say "unacceptable", because by leaving such views up, it looks like they are being condoned.

I find people are much more comfortable when they can feel sorry for me and my boy, preferably when he's being embarrassing in public or failing at something their child is successful in.
Or when they can thank their lucky starts that they are not having to manage a teenager with an SN, but never mind, special children are given to special people who can bear the strain, and have you read the Holland story?
They tend to become more unpleasant if he succeeds, or if any of his reasonable adjustments look like something their child could benefit from as well, and if that doesn't happen then the gloves really come off.
Look how competitive MN is when dealing with children who have no sn, many people seem to want someone else to look down on, to make their lives seem luckier and better and shinier. So our children are used by many to make themselves feel better. I'm not unlucky and neither is my family.

fallen I apologise I seem to have upset you. I wasn't offering anyone my pity or suggesting anyone who needed to support of those threads was unlucky just trying (apparently badly) to express how I feel.

Not that it should make any difference but I put it down anyway my DS does have health problems one of which will require a major cranial surgery when he's a year old so yes I do feel lucky that he doesn't (yet and I hope never) present with SN (because who does wish that for their children)

I did not wish to upset anyone and I am sorry my post had that effect.

@cakeismysaviour

Maybe when trying to decide whether a post is disablist or not, MNHQ should replace the disabled person in the scenario with someone from a different minority (eg a racial or religious minority) and if it is considered discrimatory then, it needs to be deleted.

This may help MNHQ to see the disabilism that is currently accepted on MN.

The thing is, if someone were to start a thread about (to grab an example) why the Black Police Association exists, we would absolutely let it stand. Or if someone were to start a thread questioning the need for taxpayers' money to be spent on furthering equal opportunities for BME groups.

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'.

I think the grey area here, as some have pointed out, is whether it's disablist to express the view that facilities designed for (for example) wheelchair users might not always exclusively be accessed by wheelchair users.

I don't often contribute, but have felt moved to weigh in and educate on a few AIBU/SEN threads only to get thoroughly dispirited by the toleration of some fairly abhorrent opinions while posts which challenge them are deleted. I haven't bothered recently because all this educating leaves me exhausted.

A work colleague asked me if I'm going to get DS's eyes surgically corrected 'so he looks normal'. Er, no, we'll make do with just open heart surgery for the moment thanks and actually his eyes are one bit which works ok. Said colleague thinks he's being caring by showing an interest.

Another colleague routinely asks how we cope when DS lashes out (er, he doesn't). Because learning difficulty = out of control, right?

I could give more examples but others have already made the point. Disablism, sometimes to the extent of freakpointing, is alive and well in RL even among people who think of themselves as bang on in terms of equality/civil liberty. Aside from the moral aspect of the respect we afford each other, I want to be free to raise my son without having to educate or myth bust all the time. It gets in our way. Toleration of disablism on sites like MN makes doing so just that bit harder. Defending people like DS against misconceived attitudes, especially ones which threaten his ability to function in mainstream society, should not be my sole preserve because I'm his mother.

Thank you for starting this thread, OP.

What I really would like to know, is just how many times we are going to have this debate. It is at least once a year that something will kick off as being really disabilst, the posts will stay so the posters can be educated, MNHQ will say they treat disabilst seriously, we know they don't, it'll die down for a bit, only to start again!

Having just gone back to check, the logic of the deletion was that the wording of 2shoes' thread 'was very likely to inflame the situation'. Well, blimey, if that judgement was applied more consistently there'd be a lot more deleting going on. AIBU would be decimated.

It then also comes across as if it's OK to inflame disabled posters or posters with a particular interest in disability issue - for the greater long-term goal of 'education' - but not OK to inflame the 'normal' yet ignorant.

Well, I apologise for catching you in my all purpose rant , but one of the issues with sn is the future possibility of genetic selection. Imagine how lovely the world would be if all the broken children could either be fixed or just never born.
This was a conversation in my staffroom today by a member of staff who has taught there for a year and was unaware that I have a son with Asperger's.
So I worked in a school from 8-6 alongside a woman who thought he should never have been born, and that unlucky mistakes should be fixed.

Rowan, I wonder if you could respond to my McCann analogy?

And bleurgh to the Holland story!

@EightiesChick

Rowan, I wonder if you could respond to my McCann analogy?

I think (and I'm not the expert on this) there are two elements to our treatment of McCann postings. The first is that the situation they're in is unimaginably terrible to most of us, and we think speculation about their possible involvement is simply beyond the pale. The second is that quite a lot of what gets posted about them is libellous, and we will always delete potentially libellous posts when they're reported.

This is frequently a problem on Mumsnet: to what extent should the experienced posters (on any given topic) be expected to debate with/argue with or educate the ignorant? It seems to be a recurrent theme. I guess part of the issue is that these sorts of threads will keep popping up (every subject under the sun has now been "done" countless times on Mumsnet) and long-standing posters for whom the issue is pertinent feel the need to reply and quite understandably get a little bit more pissed off each time they have to do so. Especially if any outward sign of their pissed-offness is deleted for extremely questionable reasons.

I think there does need to be a degree of education - but to the bus companies (picking this because it's the original debate) not necessarliy limited to society.

here is the bus accessibility information for my local company, It is extremely contradictory and unclear.

I think after all the campaigning by people with disabilities who require a wheelchair for mobility then it is actually disrespectful for such an unclear and almost permission giving statement to say 'we ask passengers to disembark for to allow people in wheelchairs to board' but.......................

If they provide a wheelchair space but then follow the provision with, but.............., if.................... etc etc just means theres a space that will fit a wheelchair iyswim?

buggy info

Well said MM. I hate disablist attitudes. I do think though that if enough people see the bad points of the 'rules' the bus companies set - eg what the OP did actually fits in with buses policy as linked too above, then we as a society can have the sense to make the right choice.

IMVHO - a wheelchair space should be just that - not it's a wheelchair space unless..........................

"RowanMumsnet:
I think the grey area here, as some have pointed out, is whether it's disablist to express the view that facilities designed for (for example) wheelchair users might not always exclusively be accessed by wheelchair users."

And the OP asked that question by referring to the person with a disability as "a wheelchair". More than once. She referred to the actual person as "a wheelchair." And that was just the first post on that thread.

I can see from your posts that you would not do that yourself. You can obviously see that it's wrong. So why was the OP allowed to do that and have their post stand?

why was my thread deemed as "likely to inflame"?
I asked why people were jealous of people in wheelchairs.
surely the only people who would be inflamed by that question are people who are.
I have been told off on these threads, on one for calling people mummies !!
even though they are mummies, I was told that was offensive.
yes on a thread about wheelchairs not being able to board a bus!!
the second time , me and a few others were told using the term TAB was offensive, means temporally abled bodied. hardly offensive as it is what we (including me) are.
so I can only assume that one of these offended people were also offended by my thread.
so mn hq will back these people. there feelings are more important that the feelings of disabled people and their carers.
I am so glad mn hq are proud of their sn topic and use it ot their advantage.
perhaps they should spare a though for the very posters who allow them this pride.