Page 18- 21
These passages begin with Dan insulting DJ and referring to him as a “retard”. Although Dan and his wife have HIV, Savarese points out , “their inability to recognize someone just like themselves: someone to whom the fates had been similarly cruel and …who needed a second chance at life” (20) . These passages make me think back to the early 90’s when very little was known about HIV and people who fell victim to the disease were often scorned and humiliated by society. The trauma and degradation DJ is so similar to the trauma Dan probably experienced; yet he cannot empathize with DJ. I think this goes to show how things go in cycles and why its important to advocate for disability rights, especially for children like DJ, who experience trauma but may not have the communication skills to verbalize it.
“The answer to the question “for whom are we responsible? Seemed implicitly
‘one’s blood relations’ and if not one’s blood relations because one’s
reproductive equipment doesn’t
work and technology cant be made to
correct the problem, then a child from overseas…not a
foster child above
age of two…with medical conditions and or psychological issues.”(81)
When I read this I linked this thought to the culturally accepted idea of family that which hinders other forms family units from loving and existing. Savarese then links these cultural practices to the concept of privatization. I found it quite interesting how Savarese interweaved this larger societal issue in this paragraph. This seems to parallel the “Limiting Kinship” section in the Ginsburg and Rapp paper. Ginsburg and Rapp note, “the tendency to marginalize disability issues will continue…until the conditions of care are less privatized and the social fund of knowledge is increased”. This helped me understand and digest Savarese’s ideas; however, I don’t understand what he means when he refers to the public sphere as “ameliorative schemes”.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document