Unconscious bias: foot-in-mouth syndrome

Unconscious bias: foot-in-mouth syndrome

We've all been there!! Open mouth, utter a nonsense, engage head … then redden with shame!! I was in a meeting recently when the breath was knocked out of me when someone expressed their distaste for disabled people as a group. Sadly I was too slow, it's now weeks later, I'm at last able to express a [vaguely] articulate response. At the time I was silenced by the shock and anger I felt hearing what I am pretty sure was an-off-the cuff remark. I so wish I'd said something witty, charming and insightful, to challenge with respect a jibe that flew across the room to hit me between the eyes! What has stayed with me is that nobody else seemed to notice… It wasn't the way it was phrased but the underlying assumption that cut deep. The thinking was clear: disabled people deserve no special consideration. The unsaid belief was that everybody gets ill, so disabled people should "get over it".

Thanks to my familiarity with a stereotype activity in training, I have come to recognise the labels associated with disablism. When asked what labels are used to describe disabled people, participants often say:  brave, scroungers, scary, malingerers, asexual, expensive or objects of pity. This practitioner survey has changed over time. The descriptors vary with the ferocity of debate and the negativity contained within the ideas aired in the media [newspapers, radio, television and film]. Many years ago evil, burden and invisible came up most often; these days scroungers, welfare cheats and burdens of the state come up with soul destroying regularity. It's a powerful activity, but difficult if you feel at the receiving end.

The moment did make me wonder how many of us would be able to pinpoint the disablism in common language, even when it looms large in a public forum disguised as a personal remark? To be truthful, I'm not sure I'd be so sensitive to ideas disguising religious intolerance and homophobia. At least with disability issues it’s personal. For example, I've heard so many variations on ‘you’re rubbish” – I quite literally hyper sensitive. Negative prejudice is often hidden, the euphemism 'It's ok for you' is often used to express: you're on loads of benefits, you get extra help, you have nothing better to do, you need a carer, you should do something worthwhile, or your work is not worth paying for.  I've heard them all, and much too often! On one memorable occasion it was a disability champion that pointed out that I had parked my car badly; and they didn't even flinch when I said I wasn't my car?!

While evidence suggest that negative storytelling hurts, it also suggest we don't have control mindful over it - our hearts drive our heads it seems. Which is probably why too few of us can contradict assertively the assumptions that have an impact on our behaviour. Sadly, we are still not fluent enough to un-think the insidious impact of negative storytelling. To name disablism is difficult, the stereotypes that illustrate its character are indistinct to many. Yet many can put into words our society's [wrong] story about disabled people. So why can we not stop believing the untruths that fuel hate crime and victimisation. Evidence in this area suggests that most negative prejudice (and positive for that matter) happens before we think, it is only afterwards that we find ways to explain our actions. However, the more knowledgeable we are with a group’s success, the more fluent we become with their ideas. By understanding the experience of specific group, the relationships, the less likely were are to act with bias (Gladwell, 2008).

To my mind there are at least two areas of confusion in relation to character of disablism. The first is that disability and illness are often seen as the same thing; and secondly that disability is a personal problem therefore doesn't warrant a political stance. In the first assumption, where disability is equated to illness, an individual response kicks in – care or cure have for a long time been seen as solutions. I'm not denying illness is part of it for many, but as I’ll argue, there's a lot more to consider! Many people use impairment and disability interchangeably, but as an equality specialist I do not, I distinguish between the two. While I understand that for many disabled people living with a condition or difference can be a painful experience, it’s one that can vary hugely from person to person. For me, illness is very different from impairment because it's transitory [in theory], and therefore recovery is often possible [in practice]. Not for everyone though, admittedly for many the difference is in the theory – but not in the practice! I've had 3 impairments for many years, they've not been particularly painful until now. I experience them as part of my unique existence. However, over the years two of them have become increasingly painful. The experience has changed greatly, the level of pain is high, which makes it difficult to move and is exhausting. This often means that my outward focus can be limited, because my energy is used up and it's hard to pay attention to what's going on around me.  From a personal point of view, I do not expect sympathy as an entitlement. It’s empathy and consideration that is hugely appreciated!! It's a tenuous notion, I know, but I don't want chocolate or flowers. I'm not ill, but equally I feel denigrated when my experience is brushed off as typical. I would like those who are around me to appreciate I'll never get better, but see my strengths and abilities as of worth. The personal consideration we extend to others, I think, defines our caring nature - and ultimately our ability to honour each other's Human Rights.

The second issue is one of group voice, and the size and scale of the inequality that disabled people face like many other marginalised groups. According to the DWP, disabled people are far more likely to live in poverty, be unemployed, not to have had access to further education, to have little choice or control, enjoy leisure activities or participate in civic engagement. The scale is quite stupefying: ‘Around a third of disabled people experience difficulties related to their impairment in accessing public, commercial and leisure goods and services’ (Office of Disability Issues).

Now while consideration for individual experience could be conceived as a personal choice. At work I think it denotes an ethical intentionality fundamental to best practice. Openly declaring a lack of acknowledgement for the injustice 1 in 7 people face - is an organisational failure. I would suggest that strategic conversation needs to address the growing inequality in our world if it is to address human rights. This would mean becoming attuned to the character of the discrimination disabled people face. For disability equality this would mean understanding the negative prejudice fuelling disablism as similar to racism, sexism, homophobia, ageism and many more. Prejudice based on unchallenged belief only adds to the pain of people's existence. It is in addition to the oppression the whole group face.  Philosophically, addressing it as merely a personal issue only serves magnifying the problem,  ‘intelligent social policy may well aim to change the world, rather than compensate the disabled person’ (Wolff, 2011, p. 153).

While learning about facts may not immediately interrupt 'foot-in-mouth' syndrome, I do think it's a start! Our fluency can only improve if we highlight and honour the voice of disabled people and the thinking of their movement. Agency has never been helped by telling people how to change. It is my greatest hope that it won’t be too long before those around me will look disapproving when someone declares their lack of sympathy for any group in public.

Works Cited

Gladwell, M. (2008). Blink - The Power of Thinking Without Thinking. London: Penguin Books.

Office of Disasbility Issues. (2012, 2nd quarter). Disability facts and figures. (D. f. Pensions, Producer) Retrieved May 28, 2013, from Department for Work and Pensions: http://odi.dwp.gov.uk/disability-statistics-and-research/disability-facts-and-figures.php#imp

Wolff, J. (2011). Ethics and public policy: a philosophical inquiry . Oxon: Routledge.