|
|
Culture, Religion
& Disability
|
||
|
Our Resources > Ethnicity and Disability > Culture, Religion and Disability |
|||
|
The following is an excerpt from the Ethnicity and Disability Factbook 1. Culture1. 1. THE ROLE OF CULTUREAll of us are cultural beings. All of us have culture. Our culture shapes how we see the world and make sense of it. Culture influences all of our behaviours and interactions. Our culture also mediates how we make sense of disability and respond to people with disability. In Australia, there is a tendency to use the term 'culture' only in relation to people from a non-English speaking background, which suggests that Anglo- Australians are culturally neutral. If we use the above definition of culture, we need to view all Australians as cultural beings. Note: It might be useful here to briefly discuss 'ethnicity' and 'race', as those terms are often used interchangeably and mixed up together with the word culture. 'Race' is a biological term which is used to refer to "biological inheritance, via genetic material, of a physical characteristic or a physical potential or predisposition" (Fitzgerald, 1991:5). Given that people have traveled and mixed with each other for thousands of years, the idea of race, particularly 'pure' race is problematic. 'Ethnicity' on the other hand, is a term not easily defined. It is used to describe a persons' sense of selfhood or identity and it is also used when people share cultural commonalties, language, rituals, food, dress, etc. Ethnicity frequently describes something that is fluid and changing. 1.2 CULTURE - A CONSTANT STATE OF CHANGECulture is not static - it is constantly changing and responding to shifting environments and circumstances. Within each culture there are many subcultures, which means that many beliefs, values, attitudes and behaviours are not shared amongst all the people from a culture. In Australia, one example of how cultures are constantly changing is the experience of second generation migrants who often create new cultural practices mixing the culture of their parents with the aspects of Anglo- Australian culture. Except for a very few isolated communities, all cultures are exposed to external influences. Whilst external influences have always existed - how else would the knowledge of how to make noodles have travelled from China to Italy? - the rate at which cultures are exposed to external influences today is greater than ever before. In addition to the external influences, within each culture, there are also internal tensions and pressures. It is mostly sub-cultures and non-dominant sections of the community that mount challenges to the dominant culture. In Australia, one such cultural practice under challenge has been and continues to be, is the concept of mateship. Women and minority groups continue to expose the inequities arising out of mateship and this has led, for example, to more accountable and transparent employment practices. Pressures on any culture thus come both from within and without. In the main, cultures may initially respond to these pressures through vilification, ridicule, tightening the norms, etc. In the longer term, many cultures are more likely to survive if they come to incorporate and mould different influences without loosing the 'essence' of the culture. The idea of culture as fixed and static is almost always wrong and has varying consequences. One common way of "fixing" culture is to romanticise it, i.e. the idea of "the noble savage" or the notion that people with an intellectual disability are "perpetual children". Older migrants, after decades of working in Australia, return to their country of origin, expecting it to be just the same as they had left it. Of course, time has not stopped in their country of origin and they find that the place where they want to spend the rest of their lives may no longer exist in the way they remembered. 1.3 STEREOTYPINGAnother consequence of attempts to "fix" culture is stereotyping. Stereotypes are often expressed in sentences beginning with "All Australians…" or "All women…" almost always followed by a broad sweeping statement. While the statement may be true for many people within a culture, there are many within each culture for which it is not true. One of the problems with stereotypes is that they become the principle identifying characteristic for a person from a particular culture and distort further understanding of a particular culture. Whilst a stereotype such as "All Australians love the beach" is harmless enough, a statement such as "All surfies are dole bludgers" can have significant implications. Stereotypes lead to prejudice and create barriers and a climate of insiders and outsiders, of "us and them". Stereotypes can also lead to barriers that prevent people from accessing services. Yet, we all make sense of the world and our place in the world through identifying with parts of the community. There is a huge difference between an Australian saying "In my country we are all sports mad", and someone else saying "All Australians are sports mad". The difference is that the Australian person is claiming their own identity - their 'belonging' to a particular group of people - by referring to things he or she has in common with others. The second person is making a judgment about a group of people whom they do not belong to and with no understanding of what it is to be part of that group. Another way of expressing the difference between 'identity' and 'stereotype' is to say that the first is about first-hand experience, while the second is about second-hand labels or views. 1.4 UNDERSTANDING CULTUREYou can learn about a culture by reading a book and by talking to 'experts', but to really understand a culture comes slowly by talking to many people from that culture and by learning about diversity across and within that culture. To understand a culture is to learn about its history and to hear about the effects of that history. To learn about a culture is to learn about class, gender relations, treatment of minority groups, etc. To understand a culture is to talk with people from that culture about class, gender and other issues. Learning about a culture is to learn about its poetry and its music, its pottery and its paintings. Understanding a culture is to listen to its music, read the poems and literature and watch its movies. To learn about a culture is to learn about the employment participation rate of people with disability. To understand a culture is to talk with people with disability from that culture about their experiences. 2. The Role of ReligionLearning about a culture is also to learn about the role religion plays in a culture and about the particular features of that religion. Religions and belief systems are powerful shapers of culture and many habits, customs, folktales, stereotypes, hopes and fears of a community arise from the religious beliefs of that community. To discount the influence of religion on a culture is to forget about an essential part of that culture. Whilst religions play a larger role in some cultures than in others, religion is one of the greatest influences on any aspects of a culture, even in largely secular societies such as Australia. The debate in Australia about euthanasia is frequently portrayed as a legal debate around issues of who has the right to make decisions about the life (and death) of a person. However, it is important to acknowledge that much of that debate is shaped through a reliance on values arising out of the Judeo- Christian belief in the sanctity of life. The debate may be similar in other countries with different belief systems, yet it may have similar overtones, due to the existence of some common values across world religions. As with culture, religions and belief systems are subject to challenges and are not static. Whilst the basics of any religion might change only slowly, the way a religion is expressed and practiced is constantly evolving. Within almost all religions there are sub-groups and different schools. For example, the 4 million identifying Christians in NSW are divided into more than 50 separate Churches and groups, ranging from the Apostolic Church to the Worldwide Church of God (ABS Census, 1996) The Anglican Church of Australia has recently received much publicity about internal challenges, with different diocese and sub-groups within the church arguing about practices and dogma around issues such as the ordination of women, the role of lay preachers, etc. Before reading about the main religions of the world, it is imperative to understand that while there is religious belief, there is also religious practice and that the two exist side by side and sometimes they may conflict with one another. Australian Roman Catholics, like all other Roman Catholics around the world, follow the Pope's teachings. Based on the teaching of the sanctity of life the Roman Catholic Church forbids the use of any 'technical' birth control methods, such as the pill. In reality, a substantial number of practicing and faithful Australian Roman Catholics do practice birth control. The 1996 NSW census identified the following religions: CHRISTIANITY: over 4.5 million or 71.4% of the population, with the Orthodox Churches (such as Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox) and the Oriental Christian Churches (such as the Ancient Church of the East) representing over 225,000 people or 3.6% of the population BUDDHISM: over 147,000 people or 2.3% of the population HINDUISM: over 140,000 people or 2.2% of the population ISLAM: over 140,000 people or 2.2% of the population JUDAISM: over 34,000 people or 0.5 % of the population SIKHISM: over 8,000 people or 0.1% of the population NO RELIGION: over 722,000 or 11.4% of the population 3. Culture, Religion and DisabilityHow do different cultural communities and religious faith explain and respond to disability? Cultures and religious practices are ever-changing and there are many subgroups within each culture and religion, making it impossible to give definitive answers to specific questions, such as "What is the explanation / response to disability within that community or within that religion?". 'Universally, societies have explanations for why some individuals (and not others) are disabled, how individuals with disabilities are to be treated, what roles are appropriate (and inappropriate) for such individuals and what rights and responsibilities individuals with disability are either entitled to or denied' (Scheer and Groce, 1988). Yet, what is generally understood about the relationship between culture and disability is based predominantly in the cultures of the Western world. Cross-cultural disability studies are at best limited. This is despite the fact that about 80% of all individuals with disability live in the Developing World. In Australia about 25% of all people with disability are from non- English speaking backgrounds. To understand the relationship between culture, religion and disability is to first understand how people make sense of disability. In other words, how people explain the occurrence of disability, and second to ascertain how communities respond to people with disability. 3.1 EXPLANATIONS OF DISABILITYBefore elaborating on different explanations of disability, it is paramount to point out that the very idea of disability as a concept, comprising a whole range of physical, cognitive, psychological and sensory states of being is one that is understood differently in different communities and even within communities. The very idea of disability as a concept might be foreign to a range of communities and in fact, many languages do not have a word for the idea. In Australia, there is a continuing argument about what a disability is. The definition of disability as used in the Commonwealth Disability Discrimination Act, for example, could be stretched to include the common cold, whilst the definition used in the NSW Disability Services Act is much narrower. Frequently those discussions revolve around the availability and distribution of resources. The ways that different communities explain the occurrence of disability are varied. There are almost always at least two conflicting explanations of disability within a community. In addition, the explanation of why a particular type of disability occurs might differ greatly from the explanation for the occurrence of another type of disability. 3.1.1 BLAMEIn many Western cultures, including Australia, the dominant way of making sense of disabilities is to explain them in medical terms, such as resulting from accidents, genetic disorders or viral infections. However, frequently people also use other explanations, for example: Blaming a mother for the birth of a child with a disability because she might have touched someone with a disability during the pregnancy. The idea of blame operates concurrently with medical explanations, although they are to a large extend contradictory. Blame appears to be one of the most common factors in explaining disability in most countries, irrespective of whether religious or medical explanations dominate. Blame is often directed towards women (ie. a child has a disability because their mother has failed) or other minority groups (ie. a man is HIV positive because he is gay). In many countries, having a disability is attributed to having sinned or offended the spirits. This might have occurred through sins committed by ancestors or by the person with the disability themselves in this or a previous life. 3.1.2 "CATCHING A DISABILITY"The idea that disabilities can be caught is quite common across the world. This results mostly in actions to protect pregnant women from seeing, hearing or touching people with disability or even their technical aids. Examples of this explanation of disability can be found all over the world, including the United States (Groce 1985). There are many different variations of this explanation. In the Philippines, a woman gave birth to a baby who was unable to move his limbs. Her explanation of her son's disability was that she had worked in view of a statue of a national hero during her pregnancy and must have caught the 'stiffness of the limbs'. 3.1.3 EXPLANATIONS BASED ON RELIGIONS AND BELIEF SYSTEMSReligions and belief systems are one important source of explanations for disability. However,
3.1.4 DISABILITY IN FOLKLORE, SUPERSTITION AND INFORMAL BELIEF SYSTEMSIt is impossible to talk about disability and religions without mentioning the influence folklore, superstition and informal belief systems have on explanations of the causes of disability. There is a wide range of explanations about disability including that people with disability are 'special messenger', that they hold within their bodies the balance between good and evil, etc. Understanding the diversity of explanations of the cause of a disability is important in dealing with people with disability and their families in a service setting. The explanation of disability also often provides the foundations for the diverse responses of communities to people with disability. 3.2 CULTURAL SCALE OF TREATMENT OF PEOPLE WITH DISABILITYThe vast majority of responses to disability amongst different communities of the world are on a scale ranging from neglect to some level of tolerance. At the very extreme end and a rare occurrence is the killing of people with disability. The best known example is the death of over 300,000 people with disability during the Nazi era in Germany (Gallager, 1990). The other example often mentioned in this context is infanticide, the killing of newborn babies with disability. There are very few examples of this occurring in very poor, mostly nomadic communities in the past, but there is no evidence available suggesting that infanticide is practiced regularly today. In Australia, some argue that the use of genetic counseling and pre- natal screening, such as the use of amniocentesis (a pre- natal test to ascertain whether a disability is likely), are forms of preventing the birth of babies with disability. On the other end of the scale there are very few known examples of communities responding to the occurrence of disability by completely integrating people with disability into all aspects of the community. There are attempts in many communities to achieve full integration and many communities achieve some form of integration and inclusion. In many countries one method used to achieve integration and inclusion of people with disability is the development of human rights legislation, policies and programs. The Persons with Disabilities Act was introduced in India in 1995, one year before its Australian equivalent. An Indian disability activist wrote: "The more we discussed the problems of disability and the barriers society puts up to highlight them with knowledgeable people in India and abroad, the more convinced we became that our best endeavours would not make much progress without a legislative framework which outlaws discrimination. The greatest achievement was to convince people, ordinary men and women as well as politicians from all parties that disability is a civil rights issue and that discrimination against the disabled must be recognized and stopped". A number of tribal groups, such as the Azandi in East Africa and the Ponape in the southern Pacific, have been identified through cross cultural disability research as standing out in their acceptance of and kindness towards people with disability (Gallagher, 1990). The best known example of inclusion of people with disability in the Western world is the example of deaf people on the US Island of Martha's Vineyard. Due to hereditary deafness, the occurrence of deafness was so great that it was in every citizen's interest to learn American Sign Language. Deaf people did the same jobs, engaged in the same activities and held positions in the community comparable to their hearing counterparts. Within all communities, the responses to disability is dependent on a range of factors, such as the need for people with disability to earn income, the value placed on physical or intellectual strength, the type and cause of disability, the age and gender of a person with a disability, where they live, etc. Based on these and other factors the responses are also likely to differ within communities. At a disability awareness workshop, a worker from a particular community said that in her country of origin people with disability are locked up in institutions. A colleague from the same culture put up her hand and refuted this claim arguing instead that people with disability always lived with their family and often contributed through their work to the family's income. It turned out that one was referring to the treatment of people with intellectual disability in the capital city of that country, where it was believed that the best option for people with an intellectual disability was an institutional setting. The other worker is from the same country, but was thinking of a more agrarian community, in which people with intellectual disability contributed to the income of families by working the fields or in the home. Bearing in mind that within all communities the responses to disability are many and varied, the most common responses can be categorised as follows: Actions which may be considered as a response to people with disability, can range from medical neglect, such as the withdrawal of medical intervention, to neglect based on poverty and lack of resources. Neglect can and does result in the death of people with disability. The lack of, or withholding resources, is one of the most common ways of neglecting people with disability. In Australia, several independent reports into the conditions of some large residential institutions have highlighted the level of neglect and in some circumstances have linked neglect with the death of residents. In some instances of neglect, other social factors such as class or gender are also relevant. In Nepal there are 4 times as many men with polio as there are women with polio. As polio occurs equally across the genders, a viable explanation is that girls with polio are more likely to be neglected and die. 3.2.1 NEGLECT OF PEOPLE WITH DISABILITYActions which may be considered as a response to people with disability, can range from medical neglect, such as the withdrawal of medical intervention, to neglect based on poverty and lack of resources. Neglect can and does result in the death of people with disability. The lack of, or withholding resources, is one of the most common ways of neglecting people with disability. In Australia, several independent reports into the conditions of some large residential institutions have highlighted the level of neglect and in some circumstances have linked neglect with the death of residents. In some instances of neglect, other social factors such as class or gender are also relevant. In Nepal there are 4 times as many men with polio as there are women with polio. As polio occurs equally across the genders, a viable explanation is that girls with polio are more likely to be neglected and die. 3.2.2 ISOLATION AND SEGREGATION OF PEOPLE WITH DISABILITYMost communities respond to people with disability through various forms of segregation and isolation. These responses are frequently seen as beneficial to people with disability and to the community at large. In Australia, isolation was the most frequent response to people with HIV / AIDS in the early 1980s with people being isolated in contagious disease wards in hospitals, with reports of nursing and medical staff refusing to provide the care and treatment needed. The way the occurrence of disability is explained in communities is particularly important in this context. For instance, in some communities people with disability are isolated and segregated because they are believed to "contaminate" babies in wombs. Another reason for isolating people with disability, is that they are thought to bring shame to the family and so are hidden away. A community health worker in Australia discovered that one of the families he had known for a long time has another child. Due to the disability and the shame the disability is thought to bring upon the family, the child was hidden away. 3.2.3 TREATMENT OF PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY AS 'SPECIAL'Another very common response is to treat people with disability as 'special'. This can take on a range of different forms, from additional resources being provided to more affection and love being given to people with disability. Many communities argue that the most common response to people with disability is to treat them 'special'. The intention of that treatment generally is to achieve beneficial outcomes for people with disability. This is particularly, but not exclusively, relevant in communities that attribute religious significance to people with disability, i.e. a gift from the supreme being. It is imperative to examine what this 'special' treatment means and to understand that 'special' rarely means equal. In Australia, a viable and still common response to dealing with the education needs of children with disability continues to be to segregation via 'special' school' system. Many people argue that the quality of education received in 'special' schools is low and the expectations to succeed placed on pupils is far below those in 'ordinary' schools. 3.2.4 PROTECTION AND CONTROL OF PEOPLE WITH DISABILITYProtection and control are other community responses often used. Viewing people with disability as vulnerable largely drives the response to protect, whilst the control response is often driven by fear for and of people with disability. In Australia one way of controlling women with intellectual disability is through sterilisation (and men by castration). The argument offered for this form of control (which is illegal) is that women with intellectual disability need to be 'protected'. The protection is focusing on birth control, but not on the sexual abuse many women (and men) with intellectual disability experience. Since medical procedures have been developed to enable surgical sterilisation to occur, this has been used to prevent people with disability from having children. While it was a practice implemented in 'experiments' conducted in Germany in the Nazi era, it was also widely practised in other Western countries (mostly with the sanction of government). It not only targeted people with intellectual disabilities but also the Deaf. In NSW, the Crimes Action, Section 66F protects specifically people with intellectual disabilities from the offence of sexual intercourse from persons who are connected 'to any facility or program providing services'. This law is specifically designed to 'protect' people with intellectual disability from carers and others who may be in a position of control. 3.2.5 TOLERANCE TOWARDS PEOPLE WITH DISABILITYMost communities tolerate (as opposed to accept or respect) people with disability to some degree. Thus people with disability participate to some degree in the community. Frequently this participation is linked to issues of work participation and economic usefulness of people with disability. In the movie 'Rain Man', Raymond, a man with autism, who had been locked away in an institution for most of his life, gains status and some level of tolerance (at least for a little while), after he proves his economic value by winning at blackjack in the casino as a result of his counting abilities. Begging is a common occupation for people with disability. Whilst it is frowned upon in Australia (although many of those who beg in Australia are people with disability), it is a frequent and quite accepted occupation in poorer countries. In poorer nations, a person with a disability might be the only person in a family to have an income. People with disability may be valued and given the status of the 'breadwinner'. As already pointed out, sometimes tolerating one disability type does not mean that another type of disability is tolerated in the same way. Much of this is related to the value a community places on different abilities. Generally speaking, the western world places a greater value on intellect and cognition than on physical abilities and places greater value on work undertaken outside the home. Other communities, particularly more agrarian communities, place greater emphasis on physical strength and highly value contributions to the home and family. Amongst rural communities in Ecuador in the 1970s, the introduction of iodized salt was the cause of major concern. The Government's reasons for wanting to introduce iodised salt was to reduce the birth rate of children with iodine deficiency syndrome, which resulted in children being born with some level of hearing difficulties and some mild intellectual disability. The communities worried about this government program. They were, however, not concerned about the disability, but rather about who would do the work (herding the animals, collecting firewood and water) that traditionally was performed by people with disability (Greene, 1977). Among many people in Australia there are strongly held beliefs and attitudes, that NESB communities and services are much less sophisticated in their explanation of disability and much more punishing in their attitudes towards people with disability. Yet, almost all communities, including Anglo-Australian communities, have a long way to go before they can claim that people with disability are fully integrated and included in all aspects of the life. Until such time, all members of the community, irrespective of their cultural or linguistic origin need to take responsibility for the way in which people with disability are treated in Australia. Australia is a culturally diverse community, with about 25% of the population being born in a non-English speaking country or to parents who were born in a non- English speaking country. 19% of the total population have a disability. This means that people from a non-English speaking background with a disability make up 5.5% of the population (about 343,830 people in NSW) based on 1998 population estimates. MDAA solely focuses on people from non-English speaking background with disability and their carers - a substantial number of the community. Despite our number, the knowledge about our issues and needs amongst the general community, community workers, bureaucracies and governments is at best limited. The questions many people ask are:
The aim of this part of the web-page is to assist with those questions by providing some directions and some guidance. However, in this ever-changing environment with cultures constantly shifting and changing, what we cannot do is give definitive answers. What we see as the first, and most important, step is to come to an understanding of the intersection of culture and disability. Secondly, we would encourage everyone to increase their cultural competence skills and knowledge and their knowledge and skills about disability issues. For that check out our Cultural Competence Works Manual Finally, check out the Specific Communities Index which provides more information about ethnic communities in NSW. |
|
||
|
"Making
it happen: a community where everyone, |
|
|
PO Box
9381, Harris Park NSW 2150, Australia |
Phone
(02) 9891 6400; | Fax (02) 9635 5355 |
|
For Telephone Interpreter Service - Call 13 14 50 - |
|
|
Website
Map | Legal
statements | Webmanager
|
|