Vulnerability?!

As Liz Sayce from Disability UK stated this week: "So we should reject the language of ‘vulnerability’ and talk instead about support for independent living and opportunity to use our talents to contribute to our communities."

I do think that it is when disabled people are described as vulnerable they are most likely to be thought of as passive receivers. I do think all human beings are vulnerable.  While I do not want to labour the veracity of the label from a physical perspective, I do want to think about the impact of the term. As humans we all have strengths and weaknesses, because we are all different, and our physical robustness varies from person to person. Equally, personal resilience fluctuates for each individual over time - weeks, days, hours. Therefore, using vulnerable as a euphemism to imply lack of strength or diminished capacity has no real meaning in terms of who’s in or who’s out. In fact, I feel, it pushes individuals into an ‘other’ category – other than human? It's ironic that the impact of a word can be so dehumanising, because it’s being open and unguarded that helps us show trust and connect to others. I'm vulnerable when I share my story, publish a piece, talk about my ideas or say 'I love you'. To me, vulnerability allows sharing, but it happens in relationships – within the intimacy and mutuality of the exchange. Choosing to be vulnerable means admitting a need for interdependence, and opening ourselves to possible awkwardness or rejection. In short, it is when we choose to lower our defences and open our hearts that we are at our most authentic - possibly at our most beautiful (Brown, 2012).

Yet sadly, for many ‘vulnerable’ has become a pejorative term. Probably because it's being misused to describe whole groups of individuals that are then perceived as ‘needy’, ‘lacking’ or ‘deficient’. They then become ‘the people we talk for’ or those we ‘make decisions about’, easily dismissed and ignored. The unchallenged assumption is that those labelled as vulnerable need looking after - they have an unreliable voice. Call it bias, prejudice or ignorance, using even the most euphemistic terms can imply the whole group is inferior. Particularly where the assumption underneath is disempowering and belittling, as it adds weight to other stereotypes such as pathetic, evil, scroungers (Chapman, 2011). If left unchallenged the stereotypes that we’re so often unaware of reinforce ideas of dependence and immaturity that somehow disqualify certain people from participation. As if there is an alternative route, a special section, until we're deemed less vulnerable?

It is neither empowering nor liberating to name a group characteristic as a weakness. I think using vulnerable covers the often-unacknowledged belief that disabled people need to be cured - or cared for. Thereby named deficient their voice can be ignored, and they can be told what to do? What is implied is far more dangerous than the word itself. The uncritical use of the word ‘vulnerable’ implies that some of us are unable to contribute to important conversations about the world - and its future. It's the association with inferiority that harms, and misusing words at work has an impact on relationships within our organisation and institutions. In the media this goes further, it has a negative impact on people’s attitudes, and affects thinking, language, and behaviour. In a wider context within our communities these negative ideas skew the story we tell about our neighbours: the tale we accept about disabled people’s worth to the society we live in and their contribution a better future.

Disabled people are complete beings in the present. But being regarded as vulnerable denies our communities a reality where disabled people share the task of imagining a positive future – one that is only possible from a hopeful present. While work is an important issue, it’s also imperative for us all to contribute to public debate and to community conversations in positive ways. Life outside work is precious, it’s a time to enjoy connection, to be happy, creative, playful, loving, caring, generous... there is lots going on here that needs thinking about. I'm not saying market conversation about is not important, just not all important! There are others, community and state conversations for example ground us to locality and place us within the world. It's not a binary option either, whether three-way or more, all the difference areas in our lives need attention for us to be strong, resilient and flourish. 



Works Cited
Brown, B. C. (2012). Dearing greatly: How the courage to be vulnerable transforms the way we live, love, parent, and lead. London: Pengiun Books Ltd.
Chapman, L. (2011). A Different Perspective on Disability Equality, a practical handbook. Huddersfield: EQT Publishing.