Confused about self identifying as disabled.

[directsunlight]

I'm just trying to get my head around this.

Claire Cunningham self ID's as disabled - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claire_Cunningham

Does identity override reality? Is this woman physically disabled, or not? Does it matter, as long as she says so?

I am genuinely confused.

Well it says that she was born with osteoporosis.

Tbh, very few medical conditions now automatically mean you have a disability. Instead there are indicators such as how long you have had the condition, how long it is expected to last and how much it impacts on your life. Most forms also ask if you consider yourself disabled. So a form of self ID does exist around disability.

Thanks, I didn't see that for some reason - distracted. I don't want to be dissecting other people's lives - it feels very intrusive and unnecessary, but at the same time, I feel like nothing can be taken at face value anymore. :/

It says in the linked page that she has osteoporosis, so maybe she is actually disabled.

It may be a language thing...I'm noticing people say "identity as" when they actually mean, "have".

Considering the hard time actual disabled people have claiming benefits, I can't imagine DWP giving self-ID claims any consideration.

I think that the problem is in the wording of the Wikipedia article. Claire Cunningham is disabled. She has a debilitating disease which will severely affect her body.

The difficulty with disability, unlike sex, is that there is no absolute definition of who is disabled and who is not. Disability is a spectrum.

Presumably there is some official cut-off point defined by those who decide who should receive certain disability benefits, but other than that, who does decide who is disabled and who is not. The page you link suggests that Claire Cunningham might have some reason to define herself as having a disability. I dislike the term self-IDs as though. Due to the association with the transgender debate, it suggests that some people with no disability might identify as disabled, which is a slap in the face for those with genuine disabilities.

She has osteoporosis and uses her crutches because of that, then has introduced her crutches into performing.

Self identifying as having a disability is sort of the opposite of what you’ve taken it to be, it’s because some people don’t want conditions to define them and decide for themselves whether they consider themselves to have a disability.

I would ask for this to be deleted, tbh. It seems a bit mean to be questioning her disability when she clearly has one.

A lot of didability benefits such as PIP aren't about what your didability is but how it effects you.

You can have a disability, but not consider yourself a disabled person - for instance I lost the use of one arm in an accident and although it is a disability I don't consider myself disabled

Getting PIP is ridiculous when disabled. I was told to piss off, then won at tribunal. My blind and frequent-seizure and arthritic OH was told to piss off despite oodles of evidence, she lost at tribunal.

I've been asked quite a lot if I consider myself disabled, including at tribunal. My response is always "of course ", and I explain why. Far gone are the days having a dx secured benefits, it's all about symptoms and how they affect your life.

There are different tests around what constitutes a disability. The legal test under the Equality Act is completely different from the blue badge test.

I think it is a choice she has made. Due to the cuts a lot of people have lost disability benefits and are therefore not classed by the state as ‘disabled’ - who is ‘disabled’ - who has the right to say? She is a campaigner so maybe by self ID she is making the point that she is entitled to declare her disability. Or maybe it’s a typo.

There is in the Equality Act specific criteria for what counts as a disability and therefore covered under the act for legal protections. It's fairly broad (because disability is) but there are specific lines drawn if it's a case of requiring legal protection/access/discrimination protection etc.

It won’t be a typo, most articles about her say she self identifies, so I’d assume that’s what she wants put on them.

I’d imagine it’s a statement on models of disability tbh.

The problem is that the woke people running Wiki like to use woke language...it shouldn't say "identify as", it should say "is".

Isn’t saying you identify as disabled more dehumanising than I am disabled? I say this as a person who has a disability. It’s down to personal choice, but saying you identity as something says you view something as part of how you want the world to see you. I know there are some people who like to ‘embrace’ their disability, I’ve just always thought that’s a bit reductive. Having a disability is a fact of my life that I have to deal with every second of every day, it’s not a lens I want the world to view me through. Also why identify as something you are? You don’t need to do that, it’s just there anyway. I’m afraid the words identify as just translate to I’m seeking attention for, to me.

I would ask for this to be deleted, tbh. It seems a bit mean to be questioning her disability when she clearly has one.

I understand why you would think that, but I wasn't saying she was wrong, I was trying to figure out - in the context of identity politics and the use of "self identifying" - what she actually meant. I was genuinely confused.

I think this conversation is worth having, because in my limited experience of identity politics, it seems like the voices of disabled people are ignored.

This whole self-identity thing is really tricky.

In the case you give OP, it sounds as if it is entirely reasonable for that person to self-ID as having a disability.

I am less sure about Madigan and Challenor Junior, self ID-ing as having autism.

Various people have selfID as being black, some more vilified than others.

And of course there are those self IDing as the opposite sex.

Where to draw the bullshit line?

Tbh, I’m always a bit self-conscious about using disabled toilets because I have an invisible condition and all those bars and alarms are clearly designed for people with physical disabilities.

Same with occupying the disabled seats on public transport.

I agree with you, ItsAll.

Another question - what are the origins for the term "self identifying as..." ? That would be interesting to discover, I think.

It probably isn't the lady herself who said "identify as"...I expect it's the woke people now running wiki.

"identify as" is and has been useful in lots of things around the intersection of fact (is) and how you feel about yourself and your situaiton.

I'm disabled but for various reasons I preferred not to "identify as" disabled when I was younger. Now i am older, I do so. It's about how you feel about labels applied to yourself.

There is similar with ethnicity / race.
And sexuality. Men who self ID as straight but who have sex with men, this was important in targeting at risk groups around HIV back when it was a huge issue.

The problem we have no is that people are IDing as things they are not and IDing into groups that need more help rather than out of them.

So for a disabled person to ID as not disabled - this harms no one.
For a non disabled person to ID as disabled - does cause harm.

Back in the day, there was a regard for facts - the "is". Now there is not.

“It probably isn't the lady herself who said "identify as"...I expect it's the woke people now running wiki.”

It’s not just on wiki, so I think it’s pretty safe to assume it is in fact coming directly from her... it says it on her own website.

Her work is about disability, it will be on purpose as a statement.

Well it sounds like she IS disbaled

And then it's up to her whetehr she chooses to ID that way or not

What we see these days is people ID as things they are NOT. Which is different.

The rate we're going though everyone will have a disability - I mean in general as diagnostic medicine gets better and it used to really mean physically disabled and now includes mental health issues, and other non physical disabilities.

So with disability we need to rethink IMO and build a society that works for the vast majority of citizens in all their variation, and not just to the mentally and physically able. And realistically as our population ages, this is going to become more of an issues.

Not just things they are not but IDing into groups that struggle.

IDing into a group that does not have specialy considerations etc is a different matter.