Search results

Purpose: Artists with disabilities use their bodies and minds to create art. Yet, the prevailing cultural narrative that art is “therapeutic” for people with disabilities shifts attention from their creative accomplishments to their disabilities. Some ally organizations attempt to challenge the narrative that art is merely therapy for people with disabilities. However, drawing on narratives of “helping” people with disabilities attracts funding. This chapter examines how organizations navigate empowering allies while still maintaining funding.

Methods/Approach: This chapter uses narrative analysis of material accessed through a nonprofit arts-based disability ally organization's website to address two research questions: 1. How do ally organizations both draw on and resist cultural narratives of disability in order to garner public support?; and 2. How do personal narratives of disabled artists associated with ally organizations support and/or resist organizational and cultural narratives about the connection between disability and art?

Findings: The organization uses narratives to address important and sometimes conflicting goals. Personal narratives from artists with disabilities that are available through the website tell a range of stories about art and disability. The organization draws on these heterogeneous stories to position itself as an ally. By including such personal narratives on its website, the organization challenges the cultural narrative that the art produced by disabled artists is merely therapeutic.

Implication/Value: Much of the work on allyship focuses on how individuals can be allies. Examining ways in which organizations frame themselves as allies can help us to more fully understand allyship on multiple levels of social life.

Medicaid home and community-based services (HCBS) support community living for three million disabled people in the United States. As a state-federal partnership, these programs are highly variable across states. Because eligibility determination and services differ from state to state, this Medicaid structure becomes a barrier for those HCBS users whose desired futures include cross-state moves.

I examine narratives of citizenship and personhood for Medicaid HCBS users circulating within policy arenas and explore tensions between these and the stories Medicaid HCBS users tell of their own lives. Specifically, I explore the degree to which narratives about Medicaid HCBS users include an affirmation of the right to cross-state movement. My analysis includes data from public statements from policy makers, legislative texts, organizational framings of Medicaid policy, and 18 semi-structured interviews with Medicaid PCA users who desired or pursued cross-state moves.

I conclude that institutional narratives of Medicaid HCBS users are an inadequate representation of the stories told by those who rely on this program and, in consequence, programs stemming from policy fail to offer services that would allow service recipients to pursue their objectives.

Medicaid HCBS policy is part of a broader story of disability rights progress over the last four decades, making its role as an obstacle to cross-state movement a bit of a paradox. This paradox points to the value of narrative analysis in calling attention to invisible contradictions and the need for institutional and organizational change.

What I refer to as a “monological” tendency is clearly seen in Spector and Kitsuse’s definition of their central term: …we define social problems as the actions of individuals or groups making assertions of grievances and claims with respect to some putative conditions (2001, p. 75).There is no mention here of audiences who hear such claims and grievances. The definition suggests that social problems are spoken into existence unilaterally by those who are especially aggrieved by perceived conditions of group life. Speakers are thus of primary importance, while listeners are not. There is likewise no reference to interactions between speakers and their audiences.

Rates of less perceptible social–behavioral–emotional disorders thought to be based in neurobiological brain differences have burgeoned, though much of disability studies remains focused on the need to challenge compulsory able-bodiedness. This chapter examines instead diverse families living with adult sons’ and daughters’ invisible disabilities, asking how mothers may challenge compulsory able-mindedness.

This chapter is based on 15 in-depth interviews conducted in 2017 and 2018 with mothers originally interviewed between 2003 and 2008.

The accounts foreground tensions for those at the boundaries of “normality” in a culture that valorizes citizen’s independence, productivity, and heroic overcoming of any inability. Mothers of “precariously normal” adult sons and daughters invited to reflect on their earlier accounts reveal both the power of such dominant narratives and the possibilities to disrupt and challenge this public storytelling.

Findings of this study point to the alternative narratives and identities sought by disability studies and bring invisible social–behavioral–emotional disabilities into discussions that have largely centered on visible physical disabilities. These findings also underscore the complex similarities and differences in families’ experiences of disability across class and race divides, while suggesting the need for institutional change and greater, less punitive, public resources.

We investigate the relationships between violence, drug use and methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) for women injection drug users (IDUs). The data presented here come from a longitudinal study of 233 IDUs both in and out of MMT in the San Francisco Bay Area. Each was interviewed five times over a period of three years, both qualitatively and quantitatively. Using grounded theory principals, we analyze 55 women's accounts of violence. We find that violence acts both as a barrier to entry to treatment and to successful treatment outcomes. Violence is related to drug use and treatment in several ways, primarily in that violence is a traumatic experience to which some women respond by using drugs. Violence may include forced drug use or methadone diversion. Violence may cause women to interrupt or postpone treatment. Finally, two women experienced violence from their treatment providers, which forced them to leave their programs. We suggest that in order to maximize successful treatment outcomes and reduce drug‐related harm for women, violence must be addressed in the treatment process.

Purpose – This chapter explores a necessarily ambivalent approach to gang members at an inner-city alternative high school, Choices Alternative Academy (CAA), as staff must both accommodate and monitor their often troubled students.

Methodology – The methodology of this study is ethnographic, drawing from participant observation carried out over the course of four years, and 65 informal, semistructured interviews of a theoretical, purposive, snowball sample.

Findings – Staff in schools dominated by gang members must both accommodate and control them, which are often contradictory practices.

Research limitations/implications – As a case study of a single alternative school, the study is limited in scope, but comprehensive in depth, as observations were conducted over a four-year period. Future research may focus on the relationship of teacher experience and expertise to the desire to acknowledge the presence of gangs.

Practical implications – The chapter advocates the utility of an ambivalent approach toward gang members in policy discussions, acknowledging the wide variety of discourses possible in regard to gang members.

Originality/Value of the Paper – While most studies of schools and gangs focus on large, mainstream schools, this study is unique for focusing on a school that specifically serves gang members and the difficulties and dilemmas involved in that task.