英文摘要 |
Purpose: The global trend of inclusion presents both opportunities and challenges. Inclusion has recently been threatened by disability microaggressions in the form of words or actions that demean and humiliate individuals with disabilities and their families. Historically, the general public could reach some consensus on cases related to discrimination in employment and housing. The legal provisions were clear and consistent, enabling victims to file official lawsuits against offenders. However, discrimination incidents were not well-documented, thereby making it difficult for labeled groups to respond to frequent but trivial disability microaggression incidents in daily life. Although empirical evidence of disability microaggression has been found in Western society, whether it is present in the Asian context has yet to be determined. Therefore, this study investigated perspectives toward disability microaggressions by analyzing the interpretations and responses of Taiwanese people who were exposed to varying degrees of disability microaggressions. Methods: The research team, which consisted of five individuals with disabilities and members of their families, qualitatively analyzed the perspectives of 11 participants toward microaggressive statements on the basis of the model of stigma communication. The team selected ten statements from a set of statements submitted to an online campaign called "One Sentence to Offend People with Disabilities." The statements were then categorized under five disability microaggression themes on the basis of previous studies: spread effect, denial of disability, patronizing or inappropriate praise/ encouragement, fear or shame, and secondary gain/ second-class-citizen treatment. The team then recruited 11 participants with diverse backgrounds (in terms of gender, age group, educational level, extent of exposure to disability) via personal contacts of the members of the research team. In the interviews, the selected statements were presented to the participants in the manner most comfortable to them. In one of the statements, a bus driver said to an individual with disability, "Why are you out by yourself? You need someone to accompany you." In another case, "Keep up that hard work, and one day you'll be able to walk" to a wheelchair user. Through in-depth interviews, we documented the responses of the participants toward such statements. The transcript of the first interview was analyzed to identify patterns and themes described in the model of stigma communication. The themes were continually re-examined and refined according to additional data through emergent and inductive analyses, and thorough discussions were held to ensure consistency of the results. Through this approach, the research team was able to identify patterns in the attitudes and reactions of participants toward the message choices, reactions, effects, and feedback to the message choices in the communication cycle. Results: The research team identified three common themes between constructs of message choices and reactions: nuances and intonations, relationship between the dialogue partners, and the context of conversations. Furthermore, the team identified two common themes between message reactions and effects: diverse interpretation and varied emotional reactions. Finally, the team also identified the impact on public stigma and self-stigma. The findings of this study can be summarized as follows: (a) The participants' perspectives were impacted by their demographic backgrounds and relationships with their dialogue partners, by the nuances or intonation of the selected statements, and by the context of the conversations; additionally, people with disabilities did not always self-identify as members of labeled groups. (b) Although many participants assumed that the speakers were well-intended and interpreted their statements as kind, those who felt labeled thought that the statements were ableist, insinuating that individuals with disabilities were inferior to able-bodied people. (c) Several labeled participants were uncomfortable with the microaggressive statements but felt as if they had to accept that those statements represented either a misconception or a lack of information. Individuals may not feel entitled to respond to such statements because of self-stigmatization or internalized ableism. (d) Several participants who self-identified as members of labeled groups ignored or walked away in response to microaggressive statements. Other participants requested clarification and accurate disability-related information during communication so they could avoid upsetting labeled groups and participate in mitigating the negative effects of labeling individuals with disabilities. Conclusions/Implications: The research team concluded that responding to disability microaggressions is crucial; however, the frequency of microaggression incidents during daily conversations hinders timely responses, thereby aggravating stigma and ableism in the communication cycle. To combat discrimination and ableism, initiatives must be established to empower disability insiders (e.g., people with disabilities and siblings and parents of people with disabilities) to become stronger advocates against disability microaggressions. Furthermore, public awareness regarding disabilities must be improved by encouraging media (i.e., the press and book publishers) to disseminate stories showcasing the dismantling of physical and societal barriers against individuals with disabilities and ensuring equitable access to digital information. At school, teachers should creatively engage students in discussions on oppression and social justice. In fact, the sample statements in this study can be used for discussion. Future studies may attempt to understand the patterns of disability microaggression and the contexts of self-identified labeling. Furthermore, microaggressions should be openly discussed, an anti-ableism pedagogy must be developed, and individuals with disabilities must be included in research. Finally, this study contributes to the literature in two respects: To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to adopt the model of stigma communication to explore disability microaggressions in the context of Taiwan. Second, it is one of a few studies to discuss the perspectives of individuals with disabilities based not only on data sources but also on analytical results. Furthermore, the study essentially captures the motto of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: "Nothing about us without us." The authors do not intend to discourage the general population to act kindly toward individuals with disabilities but rather urge all stakeholders to be open to honestly communicating feelings and emotions. |