Katherine Runswick-Cole

Repositioning mothers: Mothers, disabled children and disability studies

In this article we set out to review the ways in which mothers of disabled children have been portrayed within disability studies and the more broader academic literature. We argue that within disability studies mothers of disabled children occupy a liminal position because they are often not disabled and yet they can experience forms of disablism. Their experiences can differ markedly from the experiences of mothers of non‐disabled children and yet the consequences and outcomes of these experiences, such as developing a ‘special competence’ is largely overlooked. Mothers can work to effect change on behalf of their children and, in some cases, for disabled people more generally, however, this role of activist mother is largely undervalued. The review of literature presented here leads us to conclude that further research needs to be undertaken exploring and highlighting the ways in which mothers of disabled children negotiate, manage and approach their daily lives, operating within what are described by feminist scholars as oppressive mothering ideologies and disabling environments.

Problematising Parent-Professional Partnerships in Education.

The value of, and need for, parent–professional partnerships is an unchallenged mantra within policy relating to ‘special educational needs’. In spite of this, partnerships continue to be experienced as problematic by both parents and professionals. This paper brings together the different perspectives of two disability researchers: one a parent of a disabled child while the other was a teacher for 20 years of children with the label autism. The paper deconstructs the concept of partnership and then, drawing on the expertise of parents, suggests how enabling and empowering parent–professional relationships might be achieved.

Dis/ability and austerity: beyond work and slow death

The forthcoming book Dis/ability Studies: Theorising Disablism and Ableism argues that we are living in an historical epoch which might be described as neoliberal-ableism, in which we are all subjected to slow death, increased precarity and growing debility. In this paper we apply this analysis to a consideration of austerity with further reference to disability studies and politics.

Emancipating play: dis/abled children, development and deconstruction

This paper reflects critically on the meaning of play, especially as it relates to disabled children and their experiences. We explore the close alliance of play to cognitive and social development, particularly in the case of psychologies of development, and reveal a dominant discourse of the disabled child as a non‐playing object that requires professional therapeutic intervention. We argue that this pathologisation of play on the part of disabled children is closely tied to normalisation of childhood, in which non‐normal bodies are increasingly expected to be governed and corrected not only by professionals but also by parents/carers. In order to rescue more enabling visions of the disabled child and their play we turn to three perspectives – the new sociology of childhood; social oppression theories of disability; critical developmental psychology. These resources, we suggest, allow us to reconfigure what we mean by play and disability in a contemporary climate that celebrates competition and marketisation over the intrinsic potentialities of all children. We argue that how we conceive play will per se undermine or promote forms of inclusive research, policy and practice.

Becoming Dishuman: Thinking about the Human through Dis/Ability.

In this paper, we seek to develop an understanding of the human driven by a commitment to the politics of disability, especially those of people with intellectual disabilities. Our position as family members and allies to people associated with this phenomenon of intellectual disability influences our philosophical conceptions and political responses. This has led us recently to develop a theory of dis/human studies which, we contend, simultaneously acknowledges the possibilities offered by disability to trouble, reshape and re-fashion the human (crip ambitions) while at the same time asserting disabled peoples humanity (normative desires). We sketch out four dis/human considerations: (1) dis/autonomy, voice and evacuating the human individual; (2) dis/independence, assemblage and collective humanness; (3) dis/ability politics, self-advocacy and repositioning the human; and (4) dis/family: desiring the normal, embracing the non-normative. We argue that this feeds into the wider project of dis/ability studies, and we conclude that we desire a time when we view life through the prism of the dishuman (note, without the slash).

Problematising policy: conceptions of ‘child’, ‘disabled’ and ‘parents’ in social policy in England

Global policy for disabled children is currently experiencing a process of rapid change. In England, for example, the impetus for transformation has arisen from the governments acknowledgement that disabled children are disadvantaged. Indeed, the current policy for disabled children is also set within a wider international context in which disabled people and children are often positioned on the margins of society, excluded from education and care and living in poverty. This leads us to consider how the ‘disabled child’ is conceptualised within policy. We pose this question with a project in mind, ‘Does every child matter, Post‐Blair: Interconnections of disabled childhoods’, a two‐year project funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (http://www.rihsc.mmu.ac.uk/postblairproject/). Part of our remit is to make sense of the lived realities of being a disabled child in Britain and here our concern is policy conceptions of ‘child’, ‘disabled’ and ‘parent’ in social policy in England. Despite the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and its specific focusing on the needs of ‘children with disabilities’ (Article 23), research suggests that the modest requirements of the convention remain largely unmet. The global landscape has also been shaped by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The Convention requires each country, which ratifies it, to submit regular reports on its progress. How these policies impact on the makings of disabled children and their families remains a key point of debate. Indeed, there is a danger that new policies that embrace neo‐liberal models of citizenship and normative narratives of child development exclude disabled children from the very communities they purport to help shape. In this paper, we will take a critical look at how the ‘disabled child’ is conceptualised and constituted in this era or global childhood citizenship with a specific focus on the UK. We consider the ways in which policies in the country draw on a problematic notion of ‘disabled’ and ‘child’, intrinsically recreate the tyranny of developmentalism and frame the mother as the key agent of social and developmental change. These discursive and conceptual resources are in danger of recreating an exclusionary policy context for disabled children and their families.

‘The Tribunal was the most stressful thing: more stressful than my son’s diagnosis or behaviour’: the experiences of families who go to the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal (SENDisT)

It is more than 10 years since the Special Educational Needs Tribunal was established in 1994 as an independent panel which arbitrates in disputes between parents of children with the label special educational needs and Local Education Authorities (LEAs) in England. In 2002 the Tribunal began hearing claims for disability discrimination and was re‐named the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal (SENDisT). Since 1994 over 20,000 appeals have been registered. This article, which forms part of my ongoing Ph.D. thesis ‘Parents as advocates: the experience of parents who register an appeal with SENDisT’, offers an analysis of parents’ Tribunal stories. Here, the key question is what affect the process of going to SENDisT has on the social, emotional and financial well‐being of the family. Through a process of narrative inquiry the aim is to foreground parents’ unheard stories and to reveal their ‘hidden’ experiences.

The body as disability and possability: theorizing the ‘leaking, lacking and excessive’ bodies of disabled children

Abstract The disabled body has come to occupy more than an ‘absent presence’ in critical disability studies. Disability theory has addressed an original somatophobia through debates between social modellists, realists, phenomenologists, psychoanalysts and postconventionalists. We briefly trace these debates and then the present article considers two readings of non-normative impaired bodies. Through a focus on the embodiment stories of disabled children we consider those times when their bodies demonstrate some forms of ‘leakage, excess, lack or displacement’. Our first reading, ‘disability’, adopts a social psychoanalytic lens to alert us to the cultural constitution of the disabled body as lack. Our second reading, ‘possability’, adopts a postconventionalist stance and considers the disabled body as productively demanding imaginative theoretical and practical responses. We aim to explore the ways in which the impaired body can be embraced as a unique embodied entity through which to revise how bodies sh...

‘Us’ and ‘them’: the limits and possibilities of a ‘politics of neurodiversity’ in neoliberal times

The neurodiversity movement claims that there are neurological differences in the human population, and that autism is a natural variation among humans – not a disease or a disorder, just ‘a difference’. A ‘politics of neurodiversity’ is based on the claim that the ‘neurodiverse’ population constitutes a political grouping comparable with those of class, gender, sexuality or race. This paper considers the limits and possibilities of neurodiverse political activism, and concludes by calling for a politics of identity that does not depend on a politics of ‘us’ and ‘them’.

Disabled children’s childhood studies: a distinct approach?

This paper suggests that the emergence of disabled children’s childhood studies as an area of study offers a distinct approach to inquiry; it represents a significant shift away from the long-standing deficit discourses of disabled childhoods that have dominated western culture and its reaches. On the one hand, contemporary childhood studies contest normative, Eurocentric mantras around the ‘standard child’; while on the other, disability studies critique the medical discourses and the scope of its authority. However, while drawing on these two approaches, disabled children’s childhood studies provide more than this combined critique. In disabled children’s childhood studies, disabled children are not viewed as necessarily having problems or being problems, but as having childhoods.