246

Mar Galcerán makes history as Spain’s first parliamentarian with Down’s syndrome (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 10 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

39 comments fedilink hide all child comments

After being elected to Valencia’s regional assembly, Galcerán says she wants to be seen as a person, not for her disability

For decades she battled to ensure that people with intellectual disabilities were part of the conversation. The extent of the progress she had made, however, was laid bare recently when Mar Galcerán became Spain’s first parliamentarian with Down’s syndrome.

“It’s unprecedented,” the 45-year-old told the Guardian. “Society is starting to see that people with Down’s syndrome have a lot to contribute. But it’s a very long road.”

Her feat has been decades in the making. When Galcerán was 18 years old, she joined the conservative People’s party (PP) after being attracted to what she described as its embrace of tradition.

Slowly she worked her way up the party apparatus. Her commitment paid off last May when she was added as the 20th name on the list of candidates the PP was fielding in Valencia’s regional elections.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee 9 points 10 months ago

Presuming competence is one of the cornerstones of working with and caring for disabled people.

That's a nonsensical idiom. You have to evaluate every patient's competency and ability to achieve patient compliance individually, disabled or not.

Maybe try that, instead of essentially erasing her achievements and agency? No group is a monolith

Which is why I didn't make any definitive statement, I just stated a reasonable concern. There are a plethora of examples of parents or organizations taking advantage of people with disabilities.

While no groups of people are monoliths, many people who share certain diagnoses will share similar personality traits. For example we wouldn't assume someone with a social anxiety disorder would thrive as a public speaker.

Maybe it's your own bias you should be worried about.

Maybe you should adopt a more dialectical approach to subjects you don't have experience in. Not everything fits within a dichotomy of right or wrong, context is everything.

[+] DessertStorms@kbin.social -6 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

And maybe you should learn to listen to disabled people about ableism (never mind actual guidelines on how to work with disabled people in general, and people with Down's Syndrome specifically, a significant volume of which mention the long standing "nonsensical idiom" you're dismissing because you are unfamiliar and it makes you uncomfortable to acknowledge, something you would know if you simply looked it up which I didn't need to, but which took literally 2 seconds to do), rather than assume we "have no experience" (again - dismissing agency) and talk over us because that's easier than admitting that you even have bias, never mind *shock horror* might actually be wrong about something and have a really dismissive and infantilising attitude (you're not even special, unfortunately these attitudes are prevalent in people who work with disabled people and automatically think it makes them infallible saints. Hell, these jobs attract people who think they're better than us, and know better than us about us). And yet, to an outsider in an ableist society, you seem more qualified to speak on disability than disabled people are, and you confirm their ableist bias which makes them comfortable and even less willing to listen to us, so well done on actively contributing to ableism cycle..
It's fucked up on so many levels, but mostly I feel bad for your clients.

[-] TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee 8 points 10 months ago

And maybe you should learn to listen to disabled people about ableism

I don't think you get to define ableism for all disabled people......

never mind actual guidelines on how to work with disabled people in general, and people with Down's Syndrome specifically,

Those are all guides for educators..... I work in medicine, this isn't applicable to your argument or this discussion?

Hell, these jobs attract people who think they're better than us, and know better than us about us). And yet, to an outsider in an ableist society, you seem more qualified to speak on disability than disabled people are, and you confirm their ableist bias which makes them comfortable and even less willing to listen to us, so well done on actively contributing to ableism cycle..

I think you may be inappropriately projecting your own feelings about your condition, whatever it may be, to this particular argument. Just because you are disabled, doesn't mean that you represent everyone with a disability. I have a disability, which is one of the reasons I went into my field. However, that doesnt mean I truly understand what it's like for people with other disabilities. I can just provide context based on my own perspective and what I have learned in school and from my patients.

but mostly I feel bad for your clients

Get over yourself, you're not the only disabled person on the Internet. Some of us just don't make it the centerpiece of their entire personality.

this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2024

246 points (92.1% liked)

World News

39026 readers

1235 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.