responsibility for normalizing interactions within the stigmatized individual primarily
because they are assumed to develop an effective repertoire for managing situations. I
would never downplay the importance of personal responsibility and self-determination
in the lives of individuals with disabilities, but I realize that there is a dead end in the
interaction if we all proceed based on the assumption that exclusively places
responsibility on that participant. As a result, I have found that reciprocal exchanges
necessitate that participants in interaction must share responsibility to an equal extent.
Sometimes this means that an individual who is not apparently disabled, and who is
accustomed to situating oneself above another who is, needs to be receptive to alternative
modes and avenues of communication (this requires extensive illustration through
reference to situations). Every situation has variables that must be worked out in the gap.
Appearance and physical stamina are primary intervening variables, in addition to
environmental and disability-specific factors. It is a given now that every interaction I
enter now possesses countless more unknowns that I must consciously weigh in order to
navigate barriers to communication. I had no idea about any of these before experiencing
all that I have. The majority of people are still living in that space where the initial
reaction is to conform to established patterns, rather than to be open to novel ones
required by the situation. Disability illustrates potentiality. It brings the background to
the foreground and draws everyone’s attention to possibilities. Once the possibilities are
brought into relief, the project takes on a life of its own. When we enter situations with
receptive orientations and shared assumptions based on inclusiveness, then it means that
individuals with disabilities (and really this extends to any social group lacking equitable
status) possess more control over the definition of the situation because they are giving it
Convention