The Changing Image of the Disabled

Tia Gindick’s story about Mary Nemec Doremus’ crusade to change the public image of the disabled (“Making a New Image for Disabled,” July 30) reminds me of a giant step toward equal employment opportunity that was initiated by Henry Ford at his factory in Dearborn, Mich., in 1914.

In his autobiography, “My Life and Work,” (1923) Ford describes his employment policy as one that provided “that no one applying for work is refused on account of physical condition. This policy went into effect Jan. 12, 1914, at the time of setting the minimum wage at $5 a day and the working day at eight hours.” Under this policy the disabled were given equal pay for equal work.

The language Ford used in the text of his book would be offensive to Doremus and other self-appointed language critics in the disability rights movement today. At one point, in the chapter “The Terror of the Machine,” Ford reported, “At the time of the last analysis of employed, there were 9,563 substandard men. One had both hands off. There were four totally blind men, 207 blind in one eye, 253 with one eye nearly blind, 37 deaf and dumb, 60 epileptics, four with both legs or feet missing, 234 with one foot or leg missing. The others had minor impediments.”

Henry Ford did not use either the term disabled or handicapped in his book. For the most part, (he used) specific terms--blind, one-eyed, deaf, etc.

More important than which generic term is used to describe the “disabled” or “handicapped” as a group, or the specific terminologies, is the social attitude and policy of the social institution that may be the target of the language critics. Back to Henry Ford who said, “Unless we in our industries are helping to solve the social problem, we are not doing our principal work. We are not fully serving.”

Rather than spend all of their time to debate, or quibble, about which word or slogan creates a lesser negative image of another “disabled” person, I think that the leaders in the so-called disability rights movement should devote more of their time, money, and energy to examining and changing the basic philosophy of our society and the key institutions within our culture--the media, government (local, county, state, and national), the church, the home, business and industry, the vocations, and the schools.

Do all of those basic institutions have the positive attitude toward the handicapped as did Henry Ford? A policy of social responsibility? That’s what we need if the handicapped, and all other minority groups, expect to get a fair shake in this life.

JACK LEIGHTON RUGH

San Gabriel