I think it would be easiest to respond to within your email below. I will put my responses in italics so that it can be differentiated from your points.
I have studied much of Dr. Wolf Wolfensberger's work on Social Role Valorization (SRV.) I understand that SRV is a social science paradigm. As person a who has been in the field in various capacities and as a person with a disability, I cannot reconcile biblical truth with how SRV views persons with developmental disabilities. For scripture teaches that no matter who we are, we are of equal value before God. We are not only equal before Him, but he is in control of all events. Colossians 1:16 Romans 8:28 and Psalms 115:3 among other passages tell us that God is in control of all things. This means that He's in charge of where and how persons with cognitive disabilities function. On the one hand, we are to accept each other where we are at. On the other hand, we are to encourage each other to grow and change for the better. These truths apply to all persons. I understand there is a balance between God's sovereignty and our responsibility. We trust God to protect our belongings but we also lock our houses. When something like a fire occurs, we do what we to put it out and if needed call on others to help. Also, when it comes to those of us with disabilities, we should attempt to minimize our disabilities. The apostle provides beautiful balance of this in Galatians 6:2. Here we are told to help carry each other's burdens. This is balanced in the same passage (verse 5.) Here we are instructed to carry own own load.
My understanding of SRV is that it does both accept people where they are and endeavor to assist them to grow and change. There is a big difference between minimizing some one's disability and not contributing to their stigmatization by things that we choose to do in a particular way that can just as easily be done in a different way that does not contribute to their stigmatization. Often it is not the disability itself that is the cause of stigmatization it is what we do in response to the disability that causes the stigmatization.
I have studied much of Dr. Wolf Wolfensberger's work on Social Role Valorization (SRV.) I understand that SRV is a social science paradigm. As person a who has been in the field in various capacities and as a person with a disability, I cannot reconcile biblical truth with how SRV views persons with developmental disabilities. For scripture teaches that no matter who we are, we are of equal value before God. We are not only equal before Him, but he is in control of all events. Colossians 1:16 Romans 8:28 and Psalms 115:3 among other passages tell us that God is in control of all things. This means that He's in charge of where and how persons with cognitive disabilities function. On the one hand, we are to accept each other where we are at. On the other hand, we are to encourage each other to grow and change for the better. These truths apply to all persons. I understand there is a balance between God's sovereignty and our responsibility. We trust God to protect our belongings but we also lock our houses. When something like a fire occurs, we do what we to put it out and if needed call on others to help. Also, when it comes to those of us with disabilities, we should attempt to minimize our disabilities. The apostle provides beautiful balance of this in Galatians 6:2. Here we are told to help carry each other's burdens. This is balanced in the same passage (verse 5.) Here we are instructed to carry own own load.
My understanding of SRV is that it does both accept people where they are and endeavor to assist them to grow and change. There is a big difference between minimizing some one's disability and not contributing to their stigmatization by things that we choose to do in a particular way that can just as easily be done in a different way that does not contribute to their stigmatization. Often it is not the disability itself that is the cause of stigmatization it is what we do in response to the disability that causes the stigmatization.
However, when it comes to persons with cognitive disabilities the advocates of SRV think these persons should not engage in behavior that causes others to think less of them. However, we find Scripture that works THROUGH stigma and not just in spite of it. Many passages tell us this. Consider James talking about the sin of favoritism and Exodus 4:10-11 and Matthew 25:31-41. We also find in Matthew 25:14-30 that God gives us differing abilities.
It is not they that should refrain from behavior that would cause people to think less of them, it is we who should refrain. So we can teach adults to sing "When you are happy and you know it clap your hands" which contributes to their being thought of as children or we can teach them to sing "Amazing grace" which contributes to their being perceived as adults.
For Wolfensberger, deviancy is in the eye of the beholder, and he is careful to state that persons are not deviant, but the roles they occupy are. One of the tools God have given us to understand the world is general revelation. With this as a premises, I want to look at the relationship between abilities and roles. Looking at the nature of human development we find that as we grow and gain more abilities we are able to enter more and more complex roles. This is accepted for persons without contrived disabilities. But when it comes to people with contrived disabilities, we want to change the paradigm. We say that since these people cannot progress though normal developmental stages, we should teach them functional skills that are based on where they are chronologically instead of where they are developmentally. However, general revelation shows that persons develop intellectually in stages, no matter who we are. And when this is applied to persons with cognitive disabilities, they are caught in one of the early developmental stages. Although the advocates of SRV understand the dynamics of why and how persons with cognitive disabilities function, they want us to perceive these persons in ways that are not compatible with their developmental functioning.
The motive for teaching functional skills over developmental skills is to empower people who may not progress through a typical developmental sequence to do tasks thought to be beyond their developmental level. So I may not be able to stack 4 blocks but I might be able to cook a meal in a microwave. If I stuck with a developmental sequence for instruction, I would never have the opportunity to teach someone to use the microwave because they would be stacking blocks forever. It is not a denial of development it is a recognition that not all people follow a typical developmental sequence, and that they have the ability to do things outside of a strictly developmental approach.
I also understand that general revelation can be used to argue that since the tendency to devalue others comes all too easy to us, we therefore need to do everything we can to reduce it. However, the wealth of biblical evidence calls the strong to bear burdens of the weak Romans 12:3, 15:1. For the supporters of SRV, the goal is to reduce the stigmatizing factors of the disability with the end result being that these persons will be treated better by their non disabled counter parts. However, scripture shows that very often God chooses to work THROUGH a stigma. Three examples of this are Exodus 4:10-11, 2 Corinthians 12:7-10 and the death of Jesus on the cross.
God may indeed choose to work through stigma. But should I pile more things onto a person that are really unnecessary so that the stigma will increase or should I be circumspect in the things that I do to minimize the stigma? Intellectually disabled people are intellectually disabled. I cannot change that. However, I can give them institutional looking haircuts so they look intellectually disabled or I can give them good looking haircuts so they look more typical. You seem to imply that we should do things to further stigmatize people. SRV would say that we should be very circumspect in what we do because we understand the potential negative effects of what we do.
The very meaning of adult hood is that one be able to master certain skills and thereby grow out immature ways of thinking and acting, with the end result being assuming adult roles. Human development is very complex in that we have the role of one's environment and genetics playing interrelated roles in how one develops. For supporters of SRV, adulthood simply occurs because of chronological age and we should be instructing people to engage in as much adult behavior and activity as is possible. According to Wolfenensberger, a good/positive ideology is needed when working with persons with cognitive disabilities, . I wholly agree that we need to have a good ideology from which to draw upon for our relationships with people in this condition. However, there is a major difference between having a ideology that is based on truth, and one that is simply based on how we wish things were. I am afraid that SRV's ideology falls within the latter category. For supporters of SRV, the goal is to increase the typical behavior we can have persons with cognitive disabilities perform in the presence of socially valued persons. The desired response would then be that the socially valued persons will want good things for persons with cognitive disabilities.
I don't believe adulthood is just one thing. I think aspects of it do relate to chronological age and aspects of it relate to skill levels. However, how am I harming someone if I choose to treat them as normally as possible commensurate with their chronological age? I choose to give them respect, to speak them with respect, to treat them as much as possible as a typical adult. I am not denying anything about a disabled individual. I am doing all I can to respect that person.
Now I will at look cognitive disabilities in the light of God's Created order, then consider what it means to accept disabilities in a fallen world. Colossians 1:16-17 instructs us that all things are in God's control, this would include the why and how adults with contrive disabilities perceive the world. Therefore, when these persons enjoy doing things that are more in accord developmental level they are simply being the persons that God intends them to be.This also means that for those of us involved in ministry with these persons we need to helping others to understand this population within the context of their ability levels. Instead of allowing the so-called socially valued people blatantly devalue others (for whatever reason), we are to instead challenge their perceptions with the truth of God's word.
Clearly there are things that intellectually disabled people will enjoy doing that would be perceived as childish by the world. My point is that I should not contribute to that. Rather I understand how they are perceived, I understand how environments are shut off to them, I understand the effects of perceptions on their lives. I freely admit that negative perceptions are the result of sin. If people truly did love one another as Christ called us to love one another, this would be a very different world. In a sinful, fallen world, I understand how people are perceived and I therefore want to do what I can such that they are perceived in the most positive light possible. My goodness, I don't need to tell you that the Christian church itself, the agents of the Lord Jesus Christ are exclusive of people on the basis of such perceptions. If I want to break through to them, I need to once again minimize the negative contributions I make toward a persons perception and let them at least have a fighting chance to be known by a discriminating church.
While it is true that God has created us in such a way, that we do our best when there is an incentive involved, this is only one side of the coin. The other side of the same coin is that much of life difficult. Jesus makes it clear in Matthew 5:45 that life is a mix good and bad. SRV places a great deal of emphasis making interactions between persons with cognitive disabilities as pleasurable as possible, on the part the person who is in a socially valued role.
Who is the beneficiary of the efforts of SRV to minimize stigma? It is the people with the disability. I work harder to be more creative in my interactions, and the end result is better perceptions of those who are typically discriminated against.
It is not they that should refrain from behavior that would cause people to think less of them, it is we who should refrain. So we can teach adults to sing "When you are happy and you know it clap your hands" which contributes to their being thought of as children or we can teach them to sing "Amazing grace" which contributes to their being perceived as adults.
For Wolfensberger, deviancy is in the eye of the beholder, and he is careful to state that persons are not deviant, but the roles they occupy are. One of the tools God have given us to understand the world is general revelation. With this as a premises, I want to look at the relationship between abilities and roles. Looking at the nature of human development we find that as we grow and gain more abilities we are able to enter more and more complex roles. This is accepted for persons without contrived disabilities. But when it comes to people with contrived disabilities, we want to change the paradigm. We say that since these people cannot progress though normal developmental stages, we should teach them functional skills that are based on where they are chronologically instead of where they are developmentally. However, general revelation shows that persons develop intellectually in stages, no matter who we are. And when this is applied to persons with cognitive disabilities, they are caught in one of the early developmental stages. Although the advocates of SRV understand the dynamics of why and how persons with cognitive disabilities function, they want us to perceive these persons in ways that are not compatible with their developmental functioning.
The motive for teaching functional skills over developmental skills is to empower people who may not progress through a typical developmental sequence to do tasks thought to be beyond their developmental level. So I may not be able to stack 4 blocks but I might be able to cook a meal in a microwave. If I stuck with a developmental sequence for instruction, I would never have the opportunity to teach someone to use the microwave because they would be stacking blocks forever. It is not a denial of development it is a recognition that not all people follow a typical developmental sequence, and that they have the ability to do things outside of a strictly developmental approach.
I also understand that general revelation can be used to argue that since the tendency to devalue others comes all too easy to us, we therefore need to do everything we can to reduce it. However, the wealth of biblical evidence calls the strong to bear burdens of the weak Romans 12:3, 15:1. For the supporters of SRV, the goal is to reduce the stigmatizing factors of the disability with the end result being that these persons will be treated better by their non disabled counter parts. However, scripture shows that very often God chooses to work THROUGH a stigma. Three examples of this are Exodus 4:10-11, 2 Corinthians 12:7-10 and the death of Jesus on the cross.
God may indeed choose to work through stigma. But should I pile more things onto a person that are really unnecessary so that the stigma will increase or should I be circumspect in the things that I do to minimize the stigma? Intellectually disabled people are intellectually disabled. I cannot change that. However, I can give them institutional looking haircuts so they look intellectually disabled or I can give them good looking haircuts so they look more typical. You seem to imply that we should do things to further stigmatize people. SRV would say that we should be very circumspect in what we do because we understand the potential negative effects of what we do.
The very meaning of adult hood is that one be able to master certain skills and thereby grow out immature ways of thinking and acting, with the end result being assuming adult roles. Human development is very complex in that we have the role of one's environment and genetics playing interrelated roles in how one develops. For supporters of SRV, adulthood simply occurs because of chronological age and we should be instructing people to engage in as much adult behavior and activity as is possible. According to Wolfenensberger, a good/positive ideology is needed when working with persons with cognitive disabilities, . I wholly agree that we need to have a good ideology from which to draw upon for our relationships with people in this condition. However, there is a major difference between having a ideology that is based on truth, and one that is simply based on how we wish things were. I am afraid that SRV's ideology falls within the latter category. For supporters of SRV, the goal is to increase the typical behavior we can have persons with cognitive disabilities perform in the presence of socially valued persons. The desired response would then be that the socially valued persons will want good things for persons with cognitive disabilities.
I don't believe adulthood is just one thing. I think aspects of it do relate to chronological age and aspects of it relate to skill levels. However, how am I harming someone if I choose to treat them as normally as possible commensurate with their chronological age? I choose to give them respect, to speak them with respect, to treat them as much as possible as a typical adult. I am not denying anything about a disabled individual. I am doing all I can to respect that person.
Now I will at look cognitive disabilities in the light of God's Created order, then consider what it means to accept disabilities in a fallen world. Colossians 1:16-17 instructs us that all things are in God's control, this would include the why and how adults with contrive disabilities perceive the world. Therefore, when these persons enjoy doing things that are more in accord developmental level they are simply being the persons that God intends them to be.This also means that for those of us involved in ministry with these persons we need to helping others to understand this population within the context of their ability levels. Instead of allowing the so-called socially valued people blatantly devalue others (for whatever reason), we are to instead challenge their perceptions with the truth of God's word.
Clearly there are things that intellectually disabled people will enjoy doing that would be perceived as childish by the world. My point is that I should not contribute to that. Rather I understand how they are perceived, I understand how environments are shut off to them, I understand the effects of perceptions on their lives. I freely admit that negative perceptions are the result of sin. If people truly did love one another as Christ called us to love one another, this would be a very different world. In a sinful, fallen world, I understand how people are perceived and I therefore want to do what I can such that they are perceived in the most positive light possible. My goodness, I don't need to tell you that the Christian church itself, the agents of the Lord Jesus Christ are exclusive of people on the basis of such perceptions. If I want to break through to them, I need to once again minimize the negative contributions I make toward a persons perception and let them at least have a fighting chance to be known by a discriminating church.
While it is true that God has created us in such a way, that we do our best when there is an incentive involved, this is only one side of the coin. The other side of the same coin is that much of life difficult. Jesus makes it clear in Matthew 5:45 that life is a mix good and bad. SRV places a great deal of emphasis making interactions between persons with cognitive disabilities as pleasurable as possible, on the part the person who is in a socially valued role.
Who is the beneficiary of the efforts of SRV to minimize stigma? It is the people with the disability. I work harder to be more creative in my interactions, and the end result is better perceptions of those who are typically discriminated against.
SRV's understanding of deviancy and its application to persons is a violation of creational design for these persons. The reason SRV rejects to concept of mental ages is not because it is not true, but because they do not like the results that follow from such a position. SRV's reasoning is that when we see adults behaving in ways that are in accord with their developmental age, that will cause others think less of them, and this can result in others treating them badly. Scripture presents us with two seemingly conflicting truths about disabilities. The first, views disabilities as a product of "the fall." The second, views them as part of God's creational design.
I reject the idea of mental age because it is not only untrue it is not useful. How does it help me to be told that a person has the mental age of a 6 year old? What does that tell me? Does that mean he can read? Does that mean he is friendly? Does that mean he loves God? Does that mean he can ride a bicycle? Does that mean he is able to take care of his own hygienic needs? The mental age of a 6 year old tells me nothing at all. What it does do is stigmatize and put down the person who it is used in reference to. If you want to tell me that a person likes to play with trains, tell me that and I will show you typical adults who like to play with trains. If you want to tell me that a person can't read, tell me that and I will show you college professors who are dyslexic. If you want to tell me that the person cannot take care of his own hygenic needs, tell me that and I will show you many other adults who cannot attend to their hygienic needs for whatever reason. To tell me someone has the mental age of a 6 year old is lazy and unhelpful. It does nothing more than put a person down. It is clearly not Gods creational design for me to dismiss people with a nondescript diagnosis of mental age.
We are taught in scripture that suffering and pain were brought into the world as a result of the fall and that includes disabilities of all kinds. Because we are all created in God's image, when we come into contact with different aspects of "the fall", we experience frustration. This happens for both non Christians and Christians alike because we know instinctively that things are not the way they are suppose to be. This is in accordance with Romans 8:23. We live in a society where we believe that if there is a problem, there is a corresponding solution. However we encounter persons with various disabilities, this is a reminder of our limitations and we are not okay with that.
Of course this is true, and SRV is about minimizing suffering as a result of the fall. It attempts to define the wounds that are put on people by society that are not directly the result of some one's impairment so that the wounds may be minimized. The answer is not to say to someone, that disability is the result of the fall, too bad for you. I am to come alongside of people and love and encourage them. In a John 9 way, we must work the works such that the Glory of God is seen.
Scripture also makes it clear that God creates persons with disabilities. Exodus 4:11, Psalms 139:16, John 9:1-3 and other Scripture passages tell us that evil is under Gods control. He is also the maker of the poor. You may wonder why I make reference to the poor. It's because the very nature of intellectual disabilities often precludes these persons from participating in the social/economic flow of things that allow them to rise above being poor. One of the major reasons persons with these kinds of disabilities are poor is because there is a lack of social economic potential. The fact that God's Word is so clear about how purposeful He is in creating persons with disabilities leads me to draw the following conclusions about mental ages and adults with intellectual disabilities..
It is arguable that much of the unemployment among people with disabilities has less to do with their disability than it does with society's treatment of them. Sure there are very severely disabled people, but many others have found work as a result of changing societal values such as the ADA.
First, I view intellectual disabilities as a calling in the same way God calls persons to be teachers, bankers, professors and pastors etc. In the case of former, He does this by withholding abilities so that persons are not able to function certain ways. In the latter, God grants abilities so that persons can take on the above mentioned roles. Job 2:10 asks a rhetorical question (should we not accept good as well as evil as being from the the Lord?) Paul speaks on the same subject in Philippians 4:12 about being content when we are abounding and also when we find ourselves in need. Applying these truths to persons means that God is in charge of how and where persons with contrive disabilities function. Just as we applaud people without disabilities for their talents and skills, we need to embrace persons with intellectual disabilities as being equally part God's creational design and applaud them.
The notion of intellectual disabilities being a calling from God is very interesting to me. I will have to think about this some more. However, intellectual disabilities are VERY different than mental age distinctions. (I accidentally lost this paragraph, so I patched in from memory. Editor)
The second one is in contrast to SRV which views treating adults in developmental ages as stigmatizing. I will make the case for using them as tools for gaining a better understanding of these persons and meeting their needs in best possible way. We use developmental stages for our understanding of persons in general from birth thorough adulthood. But SRV wants to get rid of this paradigm when it comes to our understanding adults with intellectual disabilities. Developmental stages are not only a fact of social science, but more impartially, that is how God has created us. Therefore , to reject mental ages as they relate to adults with intellectual disabilities is to violate God's creational design for these persons.
I don't understand why you feel developmental age or mental age is such an important concept. I see nothing in scripture to support such a notion. On whom are developmental stages normed? They are normed on those without disabilities. People with disabilities be it deafness, or blindness or intellectual disability will develop differently from the norm. Why must we use the typical person as God's only creational design? God said that he made Moses' mouth when Moses complained that he didn't speak well. Do people with speech and language disorders develop language in the same way that those who do not have such differences develop language? The answer is that they don't. People with autism may suddenly develop speech as a result of using picture cards to communicate. Is that invalid as a means of development because they follow an atypical path? I think God is much more varied in his creation then you are claiming.
Instead of trying to eliminate and trying to minimize the stigma of intellectual disability, we need to embrace the stigma. By embracing it, I mean that we need to accept mental ages as valid in working with adults. Berating them according to their mental ages we are acting in accordance with Matthew 7:12.
I think a critical point in all you are saying that I think you are misunderstanding is that SRV is about changing the environment not about changing the individual. It is about changing the things I might do to stigmatize someone, what human service people might do. The person's disability remains their disability.
We need to work on interpreting the stigmatizing behavior of others who are not disabled. Helping them to see how much of their behavior may not be considered "adult." Somehow in these non disabled people this is okay. In many cases these persons are simply enjoying being the people that God created them to be. An appropriate guideline for acceptable and non acceptable behavior is: Is the behavior a danger to self and/or others, and does the behavior in any way violate God's moral law.
Finally, although SRV considers social devaluation as a human response to what's referred to as negatively valued differences, the Word of God has a very different take on the matter. Socially DEVALUING others is wrong, because it shows a disregard for a VALUABLE part of God's creation.
As I said earlier, I totally agree that stigmatizing people, treating people differently because of appearance, not loving them because of a disbility is all sin. So what am I to do? SRV would say to understand the social realities and to work within them for the best for the person who is being stigmatized. The best answer is that people would love others in the same manner that God loves us. Short of that, we need to refrain from doing anything that contributes to the devaluing of others while we are at the same time working to make the environment more accepting of all people independent of their personal characteristics.
The second one is in contrast to SRV which views treating adults in developmental ages as stigmatizing. I will make the case for using them as tools for gaining a better understanding of these persons and meeting their needs in best possible way. We use developmental stages for our understanding of persons in general from birth thorough adulthood. But SRV wants to get rid of this paradigm when it comes to our understanding adults with intellectual disabilities. Developmental stages are not only a fact of social science, but more impartially, that is how God has created us. Therefore , to reject mental ages as they relate to adults with intellectual disabilities is to violate God's creational design for these persons.
I don't understand why you feel developmental age or mental age is such an important concept. I see nothing in scripture to support such a notion. On whom are developmental stages normed? They are normed on those without disabilities. People with disabilities be it deafness, or blindness or intellectual disability will develop differently from the norm. Why must we use the typical person as God's only creational design? God said that he made Moses' mouth when Moses complained that he didn't speak well. Do people with speech and language disorders develop language in the same way that those who do not have such differences develop language? The answer is that they don't. People with autism may suddenly develop speech as a result of using picture cards to communicate. Is that invalid as a means of development because they follow an atypical path? I think God is much more varied in his creation then you are claiming.
Instead of trying to eliminate and trying to minimize the stigma of intellectual disability, we need to embrace the stigma. By embracing it, I mean that we need to accept mental ages as valid in working with adults. Berating them according to their mental ages we are acting in accordance with Matthew 7:12.
I think a critical point in all you are saying that I think you are misunderstanding is that SRV is about changing the environment not about changing the individual. It is about changing the things I might do to stigmatize someone, what human service people might do. The person's disability remains their disability.
We need to work on interpreting the stigmatizing behavior of others who are not disabled. Helping them to see how much of their behavior may not be considered "adult." Somehow in these non disabled people this is okay. In many cases these persons are simply enjoying being the people that God created them to be. An appropriate guideline for acceptable and non acceptable behavior is: Is the behavior a danger to self and/or others, and does the behavior in any way violate God's moral law.
Finally, although SRV considers social devaluation as a human response to what's referred to as negatively valued differences, the Word of God has a very different take on the matter. Socially DEVALUING others is wrong, because it shows a disregard for a VALUABLE part of God's creation.
As I said earlier, I totally agree that stigmatizing people, treating people differently because of appearance, not loving them because of a disbility is all sin. So what am I to do? SRV would say to understand the social realities and to work within them for the best for the person who is being stigmatized. The best answer is that people would love others in the same manner that God loves us. Short of that, we need to refrain from doing anything that contributes to the devaluing of others while we are at the same time working to make the environment more accepting of all people independent of their personal characteristics.
No comments:
Post a Comment