Disability and Accessibility

888 readers

1 users here now

All things disability and accessibility related, and advocacy for making those things better.

See also this community's sister subs Feminism, LGBTQ+, Neurodivergence, and POC.

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

How many in the U.S. are disabled? Proposed census changes would greatly decrease count (www.science.org)

submitted 1 year ago by memfree@beehaw.org to c/disability@beehaw.org

5 comments fedilink hide all child comments

web.archive.org link -- excerpts follow.

The ACS uses a set of six yes-or-no questions—related to difficulty with hearing, vision, and other functions—to determine disability status. A respondent who answers “yes” to any of those questions is counted as disabled.

Now, bureau officials are recommending replacing those questions with a set developed by the Washington Group on Disability Statistics ...

Seltzer, for her part, agrees that the more comprehensive WG-SS could “potentially yield greater insights into disability” in the U.S., but worries that many policymakers will use the 8% statistic to cut funding to programs that help disabled Americans.

The proposed change will be open for public comment until 19 December, although the National Advisory Committee, which advises the Census Bureau on policy and research issues, will discuss initial comments on 16 November. Landes hopes policymakers will listen to the voices of disabled Americans and not move forward with the change. “The power of the disability community is strong,” he says.

top 5 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] elfpie@beehaw.org 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Basically, they want to exclude people that answer "some difficulty" which equates them to "no difficulty at all". There's a world of difference between " I have no difficulty walking" and "I have some difficulty walking". I imagine the researchers judge the difference by seeing who's left behind and ignoring who is suffering to get to the same place.

[–] Electromagnetic@lemmynsfw.com 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So the solution is an info campaign to get all disabled people to list every disability as the most severe level.

[–] elfpie@beehaw.org 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Understanding people's disabilities more precisely is the direction we want to go. Using that to decide some of them (a lot of some of them) are not disabled enough is the problem. The researchers defend their method in the name of uniformity, which tends to squash personal realities.

[–] memfree@beehaw.org 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I agree. I included the links in the quoted text so people could more easily make public comment. I don't think we want everyone saying they are in the severe category when they are not, but yeah, we don't want to stop supporting people who need help.

[–] Shhalahr@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago

I'd definitely go with overreporting severity if the only alternative is denying help to people that need it.

But, yeah. It's best to keep the nuance and get help to everyone.