Opinion: London 2012 Paralympics – A real legacy for people with disabilities?

I was watching Newsnight last week and saw a discussion on the diversity and legacy potential of London 2012 with respect to the UK’s disabled population. Some of the remarks made by Dame Tanni Grey-Thompson I was in complete agreement with, whilst others left me perplexed and feeling somewhat cut off from whatever the organisers are trying to achieve.

She is right to say that legislation alone will do nothing to change the mindsets of the majority in our society who see disability as something to be scared of. The reason for this, as with many people’s fears, is because people are not aware of what different disabilities involve and the affects they have on people. Even after attending full state education, there are still some people who believe a physical disability automatically translates into having a learning disability; I’ve had grown professionals shocked by the fact that I can speak clear English, even though there is nothing to imply otherwise.

Nevertheless, whilst legislation does little for the public’s mindset by itself, it does proactively champion a change in managerial attitudes within the public and private sectors. The Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) and subsequent Equality Act 2010 have both implemented statutory duties that I believe contribute to the changing social attitudes through the public’s interaction with these sectors and their growing acceptance of the legislative themes of tolerance and equality.

Unfortunately, I do not agree with Tanni’s interpretation of how the Paralympics will bring about the greatest attitudinal change by “having the athletes here [which] will do more to normalise disability than anything we will ever see”. In fact, a very small percentage of the public will actually watch the Paralympics games in person or on Channel 4 and out of those that do, how many of them will make that tangible link between those elite athletes and the members of their local community who have a disability? I fear too many will compartmentalise what they’ve watched on TV between the interactions they experience in their community.

With respect to the legacy that London 2012 offers the 10+ million strong disabled population in the UK, I worry that it will actually encourage the exclusion already felt by many. We live in a celebrity-driven culture where the ordinary man and woman aspire to the lifestyles lead by the few; increasing the representation of celebrities with a greater range of disabilities will do more good for attitudinal change than focusing on the most-able for just two weeks. I believe there is a real risk that those people who are less able will instead feel pushed aside by majority society and the objectives of the games themselves. Changing a public mindset will always be difficult and I truly believe that the Paralympics has the capacity to be a catalyst for change but their aims are again based on the inclusion of the few and not of the many. A real legacy would focus on all in an inclusive approach.

You should never try to make disability ‘acceptable’; you just need to allow people to understand and that in itself will erode their subconscious casual prejudices.

Greg Judge is a GEM at the Liberal Democrat Disability Association (LDDA) and blogs on The Judgement.

Read more by or more about , or .
This entry was posted in Op-eds.
Bookmark the web address for this page or use the short url http://ldv.org.uk/24894 for Twitter and emails.

12 Comments

  • To be honest – given the very nature of the righteous antagonism towards ATOS because of their treatment of disable people in their assessment procedures, I am APPALLED that ATOS was even considered for this job! It is a gross lack of sensitivity on the part of whoever proposed them in the first place, let alone whoever has seen fit to employ them!

    This decision beggars belief! I am speechless!

  • *disabled* people

  • @Greg Judge:

    It really does you no favours when you defend ATOS. Their cruelty has resulted in several disabled people taking their own lives in the past few years. This is just more proof that we do live in an oligarchy where corporate interests and “jobs for the boys” come before morality, compassion and decency.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?




Recent Comments

  • User AvatarSteveL 21st Aug - 12:36am
    The Thames used to freeze over. It stopped doing so long before human influences on climate change. There are points in recorded history when Britain...
  • User AvatarDeborah Newton-Cook 21st Aug - 12:01am
    I agree with both firstly, Andi Ali, and also Matthew Huntchback. CR deserves an apology. I hope that he will not be ostracised in our...
  • User AvatarDavid Allen 20th Aug - 11:54pm
    It's funny, isn't it. Pick any academic field you like - dyslexia, First World war, GM crops, whatever - and there are a host of...
  • User AvatarPeter 20th Aug - 11:44pm
    JoeBourke If I may, some final comments from me on this debate. Thank you for your courteous contributions. I suspect you have some connection with...
  • User AvatarJohn Dunn 20th Aug - 11:41pm
    tonyhill writes: "I can’t see that UKIP stands a chance of developing a set of practical policies that can satisfy its ideologically incoherent supporters." That...
  • User AvatarGordon McFadden 20th Aug - 11:32pm
    The article still presumes guilt, ignores the outcomes of numerous investigations. Requesting Lord Rennard to consider his position within the Party is bang out of...