[This post was originally published on the ASAN blog.]
Let me present to you a sequence of events.
On March 6th, a 22-year-old autistic man named George Hodgins was murdered in Sunnyvale, California. His mother, Elizabeth, pulled out a gun, shot him point-blank, and then killed herself.
In the following days and weeks, journalists wrote about George Hodgins’ murder. In their articles they called him “low functioning and high maintenance,” and called Elizabeth Hodgins “a devoted and loving mother.” They sought out quotes from other parents of autistic children, who normalized the crime by saying things like “every mother I know who has a child with special needs has a moment just like that.”
People came to comment on these articles. They said that they felt sympathy for the mother. They called her George’s “guardian angel.” They said no one should judge her unless they had walked in her shoes. They said that it wasn’t wrong because he was autistic, and autistic children are hell to raise. They said that it wasn’t wrong because she was obviously responding to a lack of services. (In fact, she had refused services.) They said that it wasn’t wrong because he was disabled, so and his life couldn’t have been very good anyway.
On March 8th, Robert Latimer went on television to talk about how loving and compassionate it was when he gassed his disabled daughter Tracy. He called for “euthanasia” – the murder of disabled children by their parents – to be legalized in Canada. A woman who appeared with him agreed. She has two disabled children who she would like to kill, but she can’t because it is against the law. No opposing viewpoints were presented.
On March 17th, the Autism Society released a statement about “the tragic story of Elizabeth Hodgins,” which “shows that high stress on parents is very common in the autism community.” The statement, signed by both Autism Society presidents, blamed her actions on a lack of services. They also noted that “the divorce rate among parents with a child with autism is as high as 70 percent due to the pressure,” (this is actually a myth that was debunked in 2010). They never even mentioned George’s name.
On March 31st, Patricia Corby drowned her 4 year old autistic son Daniel in the bathtub, in San Diego, California.
***
We need to start looking at these murders as copycat crimes, which are encouraged when murders of disabled people receive positive press coverage. Just as Katie McCarron’s murder followed “Autism Every Day,” Daniel Corby’s murder follows George Hodgins’ murder, and subsequent media coverage which excused, explained away, or even promoted the murder of disabled people by our parents.
When journalists call murderers “loving and devoted parents,” when television shows give Robert Latimer airtime, when parents normalize murder by saying that all special-needs parents have murderous thoughts, the result is an environment in which these murders are seen as acceptable. Media coverage like this sends a message that homicide is a normal, understandable response to any discomfort one might experience while parenting a disabled child, and we can’t pretend that other parents of disabled kids aren’t hearing that message.
***
Let me present to you a sequence of events.
If you wrote an article about George Hodgins’ murder, or if you gave a quote for one, or if you covered it on television, or if you blogged about it, or if you commented on it,
and
if you said that no one should “judge” the murder as wrong,
if you said that Elizabeth Hodgins was “driven to murder” by George’s autism or by “lack of services,”
if you called the murder “understandable,”
if you said “it wasn’t a murder, it was a mercy killing,”
if you said “all parents of special-needs children have felt this way,”
please take a minute to wonder if Patricia Corby heard you.
Showing posts with label violence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label violence. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Saturday, March 17, 2012
Remembering George Hodgins
[I've been asked to put a disclaimer on this post letting people know that they can repost it as part of the blogaround on the subject of the murder of disabled people by their caregivers. Absolutely, I give permission for this, UNLESS you are Autism Speaks. Autism Speaks doesn't have permission to use anything that I write. Thanks for reading.]
This is what went on the news:
This is what I said at the vigil:
Last Tuesday, George Hodgins was shot and killed by his mother, who then killed herself. George lived here in Sunnyvale and he was 22 years old. I didn’t know George, but I can’t stop thinking about him. Maybe it’s because we have a lot in common – we lived near each other, we were the same age, we’re both autistic, although we led very different lives. I would like to have met George, but I can only mourn him. And I can try to make sure that his story isn’t forgotten.
In the wake of this tragedy, I read a lot of articles that asked the readers to imagine how George’s mother must have felt. But I didn’t see a single article that asked the reader to empathize for George, to imagine how it feels to see your mother point a gun at you. I’ve seen a lot of people talking about how hard it must be to live with an autistic relative, but I didn’t see anyone talking about how terrible it must be to die knowing that your parent, who you love and depend on, has decided to hurt and kill you.
Because he was autistic, George is being erased from the story of his own murder.
The story of George Hodgins’ death is being discussed and presented as the story of a mother who snapped, and the story of other parents who have felt the same way. It’s being told as a story about a lack of services for families with special-needs children, as though a lack of services is a justification for murder.
When disabled people are murdered by their families, this is the story people want to hear. It’s the same story that we saw in newspapers after Katie McCarron was murdered, and after Jeremy Fraser was murdered, and after Glen Freaney was murdered, and after Zain and Faryaal Akhter were murdered. The story goes like this: it is understandable that someone would kill their disabled relative if they don’t get help to care for them.
I don’t think this is a true story.
Why is the story being told this way? Because we live in a world that doesn’t acknowledge the value of our lives as disabled people. Because so many people in our society can’t imagine a disabled person living a fulfilling life, so they don’t see the tragedy and the wasted potential when one of our lives is cut short.
As disabled people, we have to take a stand against this kind of thinking. We have to get the word out that our lives matter, that our lives are our own stories and not just the stories of our non-disabled parents and relatives and caretakers. We have to let people know that they are missing part of the story.
Because the story of George Hodgins’ murder is also the story of the disabled community losing one of our own. It’s the story of the other disabled people who were murdered by their family members, and it’s the story of the society that thinks so little of people with disabilities that these murders are all too often justified as “understandable.” Most of all, it’s George’s story – the story of a young man who enjoyed hiking, who was always looking to learn new skills, who had his whole life in front of him.
Now George is gone, and only his memory remains, and already that memory is being distorted by people who want to tell his story and leave him out. That’s not going to happen tonight. We’re here to remember the real story.
This is what went on the news:
This is what I said at the vigil:
Last Tuesday, George Hodgins was shot and killed by his mother, who then killed herself. George lived here in Sunnyvale and he was 22 years old. I didn’t know George, but I can’t stop thinking about him. Maybe it’s because we have a lot in common – we lived near each other, we were the same age, we’re both autistic, although we led very different lives. I would like to have met George, but I can only mourn him. And I can try to make sure that his story isn’t forgotten.
In the wake of this tragedy, I read a lot of articles that asked the readers to imagine how George’s mother must have felt. But I didn’t see a single article that asked the reader to empathize for George, to imagine how it feels to see your mother point a gun at you. I’ve seen a lot of people talking about how hard it must be to live with an autistic relative, but I didn’t see anyone talking about how terrible it must be to die knowing that your parent, who you love and depend on, has decided to hurt and kill you.
Because he was autistic, George is being erased from the story of his own murder.
The story of George Hodgins’ death is being discussed and presented as the story of a mother who snapped, and the story of other parents who have felt the same way. It’s being told as a story about a lack of services for families with special-needs children, as though a lack of services is a justification for murder.
When disabled people are murdered by their families, this is the story people want to hear. It’s the same story that we saw in newspapers after Katie McCarron was murdered, and after Jeremy Fraser was murdered, and after Glen Freaney was murdered, and after Zain and Faryaal Akhter were murdered. The story goes like this: it is understandable that someone would kill their disabled relative if they don’t get help to care for them.
I don’t think this is a true story.
Why is the story being told this way? Because we live in a world that doesn’t acknowledge the value of our lives as disabled people. Because so many people in our society can’t imagine a disabled person living a fulfilling life, so they don’t see the tragedy and the wasted potential when one of our lives is cut short.
As disabled people, we have to take a stand against this kind of thinking. We have to get the word out that our lives matter, that our lives are our own stories and not just the stories of our non-disabled parents and relatives and caretakers. We have to let people know that they are missing part of the story.
Because the story of George Hodgins’ murder is also the story of the disabled community losing one of our own. It’s the story of the other disabled people who were murdered by their family members, and it’s the story of the society that thinks so little of people with disabilities that these murders are all too often justified as “understandable.” Most of all, it’s George’s story – the story of a young man who enjoyed hiking, who was always looking to learn new skills, who had his whole life in front of him.
Now George is gone, and only his memory remains, and already that memory is being distorted by people who want to tell his story and leave him out. That’s not going to happen tonight. We’re here to remember the real story.
Saturday, September 24, 2011
Free CeCe
More people than usual are visiting my blog right now because of the TPGA dialogues. That's great because I just found out about something really important that I think you all should know about. It doesn't have to do with autism. But it does have to do with oppression and with human beings having rights. If you can, please please keep reading.
Here's what's going on, from the website SupportCeCe. WARNING: this quote describes a really foul violent incident, which involved racist and transphobic slurs and people getting hurt.
Everything about this is wrong, down to the murder charge. Dean Schmitz died after initiating a transphobic, racist attack on CeCe McDonald and her friends. It's probable that CeCe or someone in her group killed him, perhaps by accident, while he was assaulting them. That is not murder of any degree. That is self-defense.
Here's the thing: it could so easily have been CeCe who died that night. Trans women of color die all the time for no other reason than because cis white men want them dead. And when the scenario plays out that way, it's not uncommon for the murderers to face charges that are a lot less serious than second-degree murder -- if the police bother to find them at all.
I'm furious and sad that these people attacked and hurt CeCe and her friends because of their race and gender identities. I'm so glad that CeCe survived this attack. Now she is being punished for keeping herself alive, and she needs our help.
Here are some things you can do:
- Go to http://supportcece.wordpress.com and donate money towards CeCe's bail, so that she can get out of jail and back to her family.
- Write a letter. You can write to CeCe to express your support, or write a letter to the editor about her case.
- You can distribute fliers and literature to let people know what's going on.
- Finally, if you have a blog or a tumblr or a twitter or a facebook or email or a phone or if you see people in person, spread the word. Post links, reblog, tell people about it, ask them to donate, ask them to visit the SupportCeCe website.
Let's all do something. Please. Thank you.
Here's what's going on, from the website SupportCeCe. WARNING: this quote describes a really foul violent incident, which involved racist and transphobic slurs and people getting hurt.
CeCe McDonald is a young African American transgender woman charged with “second degree murder” after an incident that began when she was violently attacked because of her gender and race.
CeCe is a creative and energetic person who, before her life was so unjustly interrupted, was studying fashion at MCTC. She had a stable home where she lived with and helped support four other African American youth, her family. CeCe’s family describes her as a leader, a role model, and a loyal friend. She is known as a wise, out-spoken, and welcoming person, with a cheerful disposition and a history of handling prejudice with amazing grace.
Around 12:30 am on June 5, CeCe and four of her friends (all of them black) were on their way to Cub Foods to get some food. As they walked past Schooner’s Bar in South Minneapolis, a man and two women (all of them white) began to yell epithets at them. They called CeCe and her friends ‘faggots,’ ‘niggers,’ and ‘chicks with dicks,’ amongst other things.
As they were shouting, one of the women smashed her drink into the side of CeCe’s face, slicing her cheek open, lacerating her salivary gland, and stinging her eyes with liquor. A fight ensued, with more people joining in. What happened during the fight is unclear, but within a few minutes Dean Schmitz–one of the attackers–had been stabbed.
CeCe was later arrested, and is now falsely accused of murder
For a month, CeCe was kept in solitary confinement “for her own protection”; she had no say in this matter. Finally, she was transferred to a psychiatric unit in the Public Safety Facility. It was nearly two months before she was taken back to a doctor to check up on the wound on her face, which by then had turned into a painful, golf ball-sized lump.
Later on, CeCe’s friends were harassed on the street by people they recognized from the scene of the fight. Individuals circled the block that CeCe’s friends were walking on and called them ‘niggers’ and ‘faggots’ and told them to ‘go back to Africa.’ When they attempted to wave down a passing squad car for assistance, the officer driving the car said he would not help them.
Everything about this is wrong, down to the murder charge. Dean Schmitz died after initiating a transphobic, racist attack on CeCe McDonald and her friends. It's probable that CeCe or someone in her group killed him, perhaps by accident, while he was assaulting them. That is not murder of any degree. That is self-defense.
Here's the thing: it could so easily have been CeCe who died that night. Trans women of color die all the time for no other reason than because cis white men want them dead. And when the scenario plays out that way, it's not uncommon for the murderers to face charges that are a lot less serious than second-degree murder -- if the police bother to find them at all.
I'm furious and sad that these people attacked and hurt CeCe and her friends because of their race and gender identities. I'm so glad that CeCe survived this attack. Now she is being punished for keeping herself alive, and she needs our help.
Here are some things you can do:
- Go to http://supportcece.wordpress.com and donate money towards CeCe's bail, so that she can get out of jail and back to her family.
- Write a letter. You can write to CeCe to express your support, or write a letter to the editor about her case.
- You can distribute fliers and literature to let people know what's going on.
- Finally, if you have a blog or a tumblr or a twitter or a facebook or email or a phone or if you see people in person, spread the word. Post links, reblog, tell people about it, ask them to donate, ask them to visit the SupportCeCe website.
Let's all do something. Please. Thank you.
Monday, May 9, 2011
Domestic Hate Murder Coverage Style Guide
(GREAT BIG WARNING: This post deals exclusively with parents who murder their disabled children, and the ableism in media coverage of these murders.)
I woke up this morning to news of yet another autistic child murdered by their parent. In this case, the child is Glen Freaney, whose mother is currently on trial for strangling him last May. As usual, the grief I felt for Glen was aggravated by rage at the deeply ableist way his murder was covered in many of the articles I read. I have written before about journalists' tendency to express sympathy for parents who murder their disabled children. This time, I decided to take a new approach.
Since it is apparently very difficult for journalists to write respectfully about disabled children whose parents have murdered them, I took it upon myself to create this style guide. If you are a journalist about to begin covering one of these cases, please take these simple tips to heart:
DO NOT write that the victim “suffered from” their disability. Not only is this incorrect terminology, but it is very inconsiderate when in this case what the person really suffered from was being the child of a murderer.
DO talk about who the victim was as a person. What did they like? What were their hobbies? What were they struggling with? Did they like ice cream? What was their favorite color? If you don’t have enough space in the article to talk about the person whose murder you are covering, I recommend that you make room by cutting the obligatory paragraph where you write in horror about how they still wore diapers when they were killed, or how they would have needed 24-hour care for the rest of their life, as if these things were mitigating factors in the crime. It’s not wrong to write bluntly about the victim’s disability, but it absolutely is wrong to use the facts of the victim’s life to garner sympathy for the murderer.
DO NOT ask the readers to put themselves in the shoes of the murderer. DO NOT prominently feature the same old interviews by double-talking fellow-parents-of-disabled-children, who say that while they cannot excuse the murderer’s action, they can understand it. DO NOT seek opinions from experts on the suffering of murderous parents. DO NOT end your piece on a “thoughtful,” “balanced,” note in which you ask a provocatively open-ended question about whether society should really hold the murderer to blame for killing their own child.
DO interview the same people that you would usually interview in a murder case – the victim’s friends, teachers, faith leaders, whatever. Oh, you can also interview those of the victim’s family members who didn’t think that killing them was an awesome idea.
DO NOT lay this corpse at the feet of the special education system, or Medicare, or SSI. There are plenty of problems with each of these systems for you to investigate in detail. Please, do an exposé or five on how this country doesn’t adequately care for its disabled citizens. But DO NOT state or imply that the natural, logical consequence of these failed systems is child murder. If you want to link this specific tragic event to a larger societal ill, DO critique the ableism in a society where child murderers can find sympathy if their victims meet the right requirements.
DO use the phrase “hate crime” where appropriate. DO NOT FUCKING DARE refer to the murder as the desperate act of a loving parent. DO NOT try to tug the reader’s heartstrings with paragraphs upon paragraphs detailing the murderer’s worries for their child’s future. DO remember that if the murderer was concerned about their child’s future, they would not have prevented their child from having one.
DO remember as you write this article that when a parent murders their child, this is a bad thing.
I woke up this morning to news of yet another autistic child murdered by their parent. In this case, the child is Glen Freaney, whose mother is currently on trial for strangling him last May. As usual, the grief I felt for Glen was aggravated by rage at the deeply ableist way his murder was covered in many of the articles I read. I have written before about journalists' tendency to express sympathy for parents who murder their disabled children. This time, I decided to take a new approach.
Since it is apparently very difficult for journalists to write respectfully about disabled children whose parents have murdered them, I took it upon myself to create this style guide. If you are a journalist about to begin covering one of these cases, please take these simple tips to heart:
DO NOT write that the victim “suffered from” their disability. Not only is this incorrect terminology, but it is very inconsiderate when in this case what the person really suffered from was being the child of a murderer.
DO talk about who the victim was as a person. What did they like? What were their hobbies? What were they struggling with? Did they like ice cream? What was their favorite color? If you don’t have enough space in the article to talk about the person whose murder you are covering, I recommend that you make room by cutting the obligatory paragraph where you write in horror about how they still wore diapers when they were killed, or how they would have needed 24-hour care for the rest of their life, as if these things were mitigating factors in the crime. It’s not wrong to write bluntly about the victim’s disability, but it absolutely is wrong to use the facts of the victim’s life to garner sympathy for the murderer.
DO NOT ask the readers to put themselves in the shoes of the murderer. DO NOT prominently feature the same old interviews by double-talking fellow-parents-of-disabled-children, who say that while they cannot excuse the murderer’s action, they can understand it. DO NOT seek opinions from experts on the suffering of murderous parents. DO NOT end your piece on a “thoughtful,” “balanced,” note in which you ask a provocatively open-ended question about whether society should really hold the murderer to blame for killing their own child.
DO interview the same people that you would usually interview in a murder case – the victim’s friends, teachers, faith leaders, whatever. Oh, you can also interview those of the victim’s family members who didn’t think that killing them was an awesome idea.
DO NOT lay this corpse at the feet of the special education system, or Medicare, or SSI. There are plenty of problems with each of these systems for you to investigate in detail. Please, do an exposé or five on how this country doesn’t adequately care for its disabled citizens. But DO NOT state or imply that the natural, logical consequence of these failed systems is child murder. If you want to link this specific tragic event to a larger societal ill, DO critique the ableism in a society where child murderers can find sympathy if their victims meet the right requirements.
DO use the phrase “hate crime” where appropriate. DO NOT FUCKING DARE refer to the murder as the desperate act of a loving parent. DO NOT try to tug the reader’s heartstrings with paragraphs upon paragraphs detailing the murderer’s worries for their child’s future. DO remember that if the murderer was concerned about their child’s future, they would not have prevented their child from having one.
DO remember as you write this article that when a parent murders their child, this is a bad thing.
Saturday, April 16, 2011
Headlines: Abuse and Empathy
(WARNING: this post discusses child abuse)
We are two weeks into Autism Awareness Month and I count three casualties so far. Two stories in the news this week, of three autistic children murdered or abused by their parents and caretakers.
In Washington, two autistic boys (ages 5 and 7) were discovered locked in a cage, where their father and his fiancee kept them every day, in unsanitary conditions. They weren't allowed to walk around the house or to go to school. I don't know their names. Their father, John Eckhart, told police: "What am I supposed to do? Let them run around the house? They're autistic."
In Massachusetts, Kristin LaBrie was found guilty of "attempted murder, assault and battery on a disabled person and a child, and child endangerment," after she withheld chemotherapy drugs from her 9-year-old autistic son, Jeremy Fraser. This actually happened years ago, but was in the news again this week because of the sentencing. Jeremy was non-verbal and had lymphoma (blood cancer). He had been getting treatment at a local hospital, and his cancer was in remission. When he was moved home from the hospital, doctors gave his mother medication to give to him, and predicted that he would recover. But LaBrie did not administer the drugs, and Jeremy's cancer recurred, this time as leukemia. Jeremy died in March 2009. This week, LaBrie was sentenced to 8-10 years in jail, and 5 years on probation.
These are only the cases which have made it into the news this week. There are many more autistic people out there, right now, facing abuse and neglect in their homes, in their schools, in institutions. Their suffering is being permitted, hidden, or ignored.
Autism "experts" have already spoken up, defending the parents involved in these two cases. Neatha Lefevre, of the Autism Society of Washington, presented a stunningly sunny picture of the Oregon case. She told reporters: “The behaviors [of an autistic child] can be very challenging." Referring to Eckhart, who kept his sons in a dirty cage, she said, "When [parents] do this extreme, they feel this is the safest way to keep their children. The family will choose extremes because they don’t have good information.”
As for the Massachusetts case, apparently even the prosecutor "[expressed] sympathy for the challenges of caring for a sick, disabled child." TIME Magazine ran an article which began by asking readers to place themselves in Kristin LaBrie's shoes: "Imagine you are a single mother suffering from depression, overwhelmed with caring for an autistic, nonverbal and developmentally disabled son. If he were diagnosed with cancer, what would you do?" The article quotes a Boston-area attorney as saying:
"It can be so overwhelming for a single parent to deal with a child who is autistic, nonverbal, and developmentally delayed. It is cruel to add to that burden a diagnosis of cancer and a requirement that the mom administer medicine that will cause the child even more pain."
TIME also quotes medical ethicist Cynthia Rushton, whose take on a mother withholding life-saving drugs was: "I suspect this mother was really trying to do the best she could for him... what does it mean to be a good parent in this circumstance?" The article's author writes, "Was justice done? It's hard to know. Certainly, disabled children have rights. But moms do too, and it appears that LaBrie did not have adequate support."
As with most cases in which a parent abuses or murders a disabled child, there are a lot of voices urging us to feel empathy for the parent, to imagine how hard it is to have an autistic child. As far as I know, these "experts" have yet feel empathy for the child, to imagine how hard it is to be an autistic child with abusive or murderous parents.
Meanwhile, former PBS news anchor Robert MacNeil is returning to television with a special report called Autism Now. In a promotional interview, MacNeil described autism this way:
"It delays the most -- delays or impairs for life -- the most human thing we have, which is our ability to look into each others eyes and feel that other person's existence and what might be going on in their mind, and to empathize with them. That is denied -- largely denied -- to children with autism."
Rachel Cohen-Rottenberg addresses this claim with an open letter, posted here.
Every day, autistic people are being murdered and abused by people who are supposed to provide them with love and care. And every day, people tell each other that autistic people are the ones who lack empathy, never pointing out that often, it is neurotypical people who do not have empathy for us.
Let's take a moment to remember the connection between people who speak about us as though we are not human and people who treat us inhumanely.
We are two weeks into Autism Awareness Month and I count three casualties so far. Two stories in the news this week, of three autistic children murdered or abused by their parents and caretakers.
In Washington, two autistic boys (ages 5 and 7) were discovered locked in a cage, where their father and his fiancee kept them every day, in unsanitary conditions. They weren't allowed to walk around the house or to go to school. I don't know their names. Their father, John Eckhart, told police: "What am I supposed to do? Let them run around the house? They're autistic."
In Massachusetts, Kristin LaBrie was found guilty of "attempted murder, assault and battery on a disabled person and a child, and child endangerment," after she withheld chemotherapy drugs from her 9-year-old autistic son, Jeremy Fraser. This actually happened years ago, but was in the news again this week because of the sentencing. Jeremy was non-verbal and had lymphoma (blood cancer). He had been getting treatment at a local hospital, and his cancer was in remission. When he was moved home from the hospital, doctors gave his mother medication to give to him, and predicted that he would recover. But LaBrie did not administer the drugs, and Jeremy's cancer recurred, this time as leukemia. Jeremy died in March 2009. This week, LaBrie was sentenced to 8-10 years in jail, and 5 years on probation.
These are only the cases which have made it into the news this week. There are many more autistic people out there, right now, facing abuse and neglect in their homes, in their schools, in institutions. Their suffering is being permitted, hidden, or ignored.
Autism "experts" have already spoken up, defending the parents involved in these two cases. Neatha Lefevre, of the Autism Society of Washington, presented a stunningly sunny picture of the Oregon case. She told reporters: “The behaviors [of an autistic child] can be very challenging." Referring to Eckhart, who kept his sons in a dirty cage, she said, "When [parents] do this extreme, they feel this is the safest way to keep their children. The family will choose extremes because they don’t have good information.”
As for the Massachusetts case, apparently even the prosecutor "[expressed] sympathy for the challenges of caring for a sick, disabled child." TIME Magazine ran an article which began by asking readers to place themselves in Kristin LaBrie's shoes: "Imagine you are a single mother suffering from depression, overwhelmed with caring for an autistic, nonverbal and developmentally disabled son. If he were diagnosed with cancer, what would you do?" The article quotes a Boston-area attorney as saying:
"It can be so overwhelming for a single parent to deal with a child who is autistic, nonverbal, and developmentally delayed. It is cruel to add to that burden a diagnosis of cancer and a requirement that the mom administer medicine that will cause the child even more pain."
TIME also quotes medical ethicist Cynthia Rushton, whose take on a mother withholding life-saving drugs was: "I suspect this mother was really trying to do the best she could for him... what does it mean to be a good parent in this circumstance?" The article's author writes, "Was justice done? It's hard to know. Certainly, disabled children have rights. But moms do too, and it appears that LaBrie did not have adequate support."
As with most cases in which a parent abuses or murders a disabled child, there are a lot of voices urging us to feel empathy for the parent, to imagine how hard it is to have an autistic child. As far as I know, these "experts" have yet feel empathy for the child, to imagine how hard it is to be an autistic child with abusive or murderous parents.
Meanwhile, former PBS news anchor Robert MacNeil is returning to television with a special report called Autism Now. In a promotional interview, MacNeil described autism this way:
"It delays the most -- delays or impairs for life -- the most human thing we have, which is our ability to look into each others eyes and feel that other person's existence and what might be going on in their mind, and to empathize with them. That is denied -- largely denied -- to children with autism."
Rachel Cohen-Rottenberg addresses this claim with an open letter, posted here.
Every day, autistic people are being murdered and abused by people who are supposed to provide them with love and care. And every day, people tell each other that autistic people are the ones who lack empathy, never pointing out that often, it is neurotypical people who do not have empathy for us.
Let's take a moment to remember the connection between people who speak about us as though we are not human and people who treat us inhumanely.
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Recommended Reading (and Donating)
I have a lot of links to talk up and that means it's time for recommended reading!
Asher wrote Critical Condition about a clinic in San Francisco called Lyon Martin. Lyon Martin provides respectful health care on a sliding scale to women and trans people. One of my friends gets hormones from Lyon Martin, and it has really made a difference for them to have access to this level of care. But Lyon Martin may have to close, and they're asking for donations so that they can stay open. If you can afford it, please donate on their website!
Amanda, Julia and I are starting a new disability group blog! It's called LOVE-NOS, and it's filling the hole that FWD left in our lives. If you want to be a contributor or write a guest post, please let one of us know. All the posts that are currently up there are great, and you should definitely check it out.
Amanda and I also started bad brains wearing clothes, which is kind of silly but also awesome. It's basically a brain disability fashion blog.
Finally, please read Insanely Cruel, which is everything I wanted to say after the Giffords shooting even though it was written before the Giffords shooting. It's about the assumption that anyone who would kill a lot of people must be "crazy," and how that comes from people's unwillingness to acknowledge their own capacity for evil, and how it's really ableist. This piece is short, too, and it's really important and you should just go read it.
Asher wrote Critical Condition about a clinic in San Francisco called Lyon Martin. Lyon Martin provides respectful health care on a sliding scale to women and trans people. One of my friends gets hormones from Lyon Martin, and it has really made a difference for them to have access to this level of care. But Lyon Martin may have to close, and they're asking for donations so that they can stay open. If you can afford it, please donate on their website!
Amanda, Julia and I are starting a new disability group blog! It's called LOVE-NOS, and it's filling the hole that FWD left in our lives. If you want to be a contributor or write a guest post, please let one of us know. All the posts that are currently up there are great, and you should definitely check it out.
Amanda and I also started bad brains wearing clothes, which is kind of silly but also awesome. It's basically a brain disability fashion blog.
Finally, please read Insanely Cruel, which is everything I wanted to say after the Giffords shooting even though it was written before the Giffords shooting. It's about the assumption that anyone who would kill a lot of people must be "crazy," and how that comes from people's unwillingness to acknowledge their own capacity for evil, and how it's really ableist. This piece is short, too, and it's really important and you should just go read it.
Sunday, December 26, 2010
I Know Who Baby Knauer Was
[Trigger warning for discussion of (historical) violence against disabled people.]
Finals week was a weird time to be knocked down by history.
I'd been researching and writing a final paper for my German history class (weeks overdue) on a topic that I've studied before: disabled people in the Nazi regime. Really sad, grim stuff, and I knew that going in.
But here's the thing that I've learned from three years of genocide studies and a lifetime of Holocaust-related neuroses: you know that saying? The one every history major has heard several thousand times? That one death is a tragedy, and a million deaths is a statistic?
Well, it's kind of true.
Not that you can't feel sad about a million deaths. But for me personally, there's something abstract, something incomprehensible about deaths that are presented only as numbers. One death is easier to understand, because all around me are individuals I love, and I know how crushed I would be if one of them died. It's somehow easier for me to conceptualize a death if I know some details about the person who died: their name, something about their life story.
The person I knew as baby Knauer lived for such a short time, there was very little of his life story to tell. Until finals week, I didn't know that story. Now I do. And where before I had been outraged at the injustice of baby Knauer's death, now I feel utter grief.
Let me explain.
Probably everyone who has done research on the Nazi 'euthanasia' program knows about the Knauer case. The basic facts are: a man who for a long time was only known as Herr Knauer petitioned Hitler to have his infant child killed after his child was born blind and with some physical deformities. Hitler sent his personal physician, Karl Brandt, to assess the baby. If Brandt deemed the child "unworthy of life," he was authorized to have the child killed. Brandt decided baby Knauer should die, and baby Knauer did. Soon after this, the children's killing program began, and then the T4 adult killing program. Baby Knauer was the first victim of Nazi 'euthanasia.'
Then, in 2007, historian Ulf Schmidt published a biography of Karl Brandt. In this biography, Schmidt revealed the details of baby Knauer's life, saying that he didn't feel it was right to "place the justifiable claim of the parents for anonymity above the personality and suffering of the first 'euthanasia' victim."
In my school library, I found Schmidt's book and read the section on the Knauer case. Here's what I learned:
Gerhard Herbert Kretschmar was born on February 20th, 1939, in a village called Pomβen. He was blind, and "lacked one leg and part of an arm." Some doctors speculated that he was "feeble-minded" but realistically they probably couldn't have known this at his age. His parents, Richard Gerhardt Kretschmar and Lina Sonja Kretschmar, believed strongly in Nazi ideology, and his father wanted him dead.
Schmidt writes that Richard Kretschmar took Gerhardt to the Leipzig Children's Clinic "in the spring of 1939" -- when Gerhardt was just one or two months old -- and had him institutionalized there. Werner Catel, the head of the clinic, later testified that Herr Kretschmar had wanted him to kill Gerhardt right then, but Catel refused because of legal concerns. (As an aside here, Catel took part in the T4 program later, so when he refused to kill Gerhardt he didn't have any moral problems with infanticide -- he was just concerned about going to jail.) When Catel would not kill Gerhardt, Herr Kretschmar or perhaps one of his relatives petitioned Hitler directly to end the child's life. Hitler sent Karl Brandt to examine Gerhard and decide whether he should live or die. After confirming that Gerhard was blind and physically disabled, Brandt authorized the clinic staff to kill the baby, and Gerhard was murdered on July 25, 1939. He was five months old.
Once I read those names and dates, I couldn't get them out of my head for days. It's strange to think that these few details -- Gerhard's name, his assigned sex, his birth and death dates -- would change my perception of the case. I wish that it didn't matter, that I would feel just as much grief for a nameless child murdered 70 years ago as I would for a named one, but somehow the name is important to me. Today, when parents continue to murder their children, when people call themselves part of the disability community while dreaming of a world without us, it seems vitally important to hold on to that name.
Finals week was a weird time to be knocked down by history.
I'd been researching and writing a final paper for my German history class (weeks overdue) on a topic that I've studied before: disabled people in the Nazi regime. Really sad, grim stuff, and I knew that going in.
But here's the thing that I've learned from three years of genocide studies and a lifetime of Holocaust-related neuroses: you know that saying? The one every history major has heard several thousand times? That one death is a tragedy, and a million deaths is a statistic?
Well, it's kind of true.
Not that you can't feel sad about a million deaths. But for me personally, there's something abstract, something incomprehensible about deaths that are presented only as numbers. One death is easier to understand, because all around me are individuals I love, and I know how crushed I would be if one of them died. It's somehow easier for me to conceptualize a death if I know some details about the person who died: their name, something about their life story.
The person I knew as baby Knauer lived for such a short time, there was very little of his life story to tell. Until finals week, I didn't know that story. Now I do. And where before I had been outraged at the injustice of baby Knauer's death, now I feel utter grief.
Let me explain.
Probably everyone who has done research on the Nazi 'euthanasia' program knows about the Knauer case. The basic facts are: a man who for a long time was only known as Herr Knauer petitioned Hitler to have his infant child killed after his child was born blind and with some physical deformities. Hitler sent his personal physician, Karl Brandt, to assess the baby. If Brandt deemed the child "unworthy of life," he was authorized to have the child killed. Brandt decided baby Knauer should die, and baby Knauer did. Soon after this, the children's killing program began, and then the T4 adult killing program. Baby Knauer was the first victim of Nazi 'euthanasia.'
Then, in 2007, historian Ulf Schmidt published a biography of Karl Brandt. In this biography, Schmidt revealed the details of baby Knauer's life, saying that he didn't feel it was right to "place the justifiable claim of the parents for anonymity above the personality and suffering of the first 'euthanasia' victim."
In my school library, I found Schmidt's book and read the section on the Knauer case. Here's what I learned:
Gerhard Herbert Kretschmar was born on February 20th, 1939, in a village called Pomβen. He was blind, and "lacked one leg and part of an arm." Some doctors speculated that he was "feeble-minded" but realistically they probably couldn't have known this at his age. His parents, Richard Gerhardt Kretschmar and Lina Sonja Kretschmar, believed strongly in Nazi ideology, and his father wanted him dead.
Schmidt writes that Richard Kretschmar took Gerhardt to the Leipzig Children's Clinic "in the spring of 1939" -- when Gerhardt was just one or two months old -- and had him institutionalized there. Werner Catel, the head of the clinic, later testified that Herr Kretschmar had wanted him to kill Gerhardt right then, but Catel refused because of legal concerns. (As an aside here, Catel took part in the T4 program later, so when he refused to kill Gerhardt he didn't have any moral problems with infanticide -- he was just concerned about going to jail.) When Catel would not kill Gerhardt, Herr Kretschmar or perhaps one of his relatives petitioned Hitler directly to end the child's life. Hitler sent Karl Brandt to examine Gerhard and decide whether he should live or die. After confirming that Gerhard was blind and physically disabled, Brandt authorized the clinic staff to kill the baby, and Gerhard was murdered on July 25, 1939. He was five months old.
Once I read those names and dates, I couldn't get them out of my head for days. It's strange to think that these few details -- Gerhard's name, his assigned sex, his birth and death dates -- would change my perception of the case. I wish that it didn't matter, that I would feel just as much grief for a nameless child murdered 70 years ago as I would for a named one, but somehow the name is important to me. Today, when parents continue to murder their children, when people call themselves part of the disability community while dreaming of a world without us, it seems vitally important to hold on to that name.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)