Divisions

There may be some general ways in which the motives of the professional, parent, and self-advocacy community line up.

I had originally started that last sentence as "there are some general ways," but as I tried to finish the sentence with a few examples, I wrote and deleted, wrote and deleted, wrote and deleted until I realized that I'm not entirely sure there are any at all. There are momentary overlaps, some parents share the motivations of some professionals on some things, some professionals share the motivations of some self-advocates on some things, and so on. Nothing global. I'm reminded vividly of the paper on professionals, parents, and self-advocates that broke down some of the core reasons for why the motivations of each group are so often divided or even at odds.

That's not where it ends either. Within each group there are also conflicting motives--some professionals want different things for their clients than other professionals. Some parents want different things for their children than other parents. And some self-advocates want different things for themselves than other self-advocates.

I'm thinking about this a lot today. Partly because I think about it always, knowing there is nothing I can post here that won't enrage someone, no matter how innocuous seeming. But mostly because later this week I'll be attending and presenting at the Oregon Disability Megaconference which attempts to cater equally to an audience of professionals, parents, and self-advocates.

This is the second year of the Megaconference. I missed the first year because I was at the AAIDD conference, presenting on something more science than advocacy. So I'm not sure entirely what to expect. I do know that the conference format--two or three sessions per day with long breaks in between--is like 500,000,000 times more do-able for me than the typical breakneck schedule (speaking of more accommodating conferences). I also do know that there are a number of presentations that are explicitly for a self-advocate audience, and which are being given by (and for) self-advocates and not professionals or parents. Which bodes well.

What I don't know however is how that divide will play out. How many of those autism or child-related presentations would make me enraged? Or pleased? Is the presentation on "Understanding Guardianship" going to be one that addresses the issues that are important to self-advocates, or will it be highlighting those things we most adamantly oppose? Is it even possible to create an event that is for all three audiences without falling into that divide?

No matter how much each group might educate the other, come to understand the point of view of the other, or even work on a daily basis with the other, sometimes I wonder if there might not be some good reasons for that divide. Maybe sometimes the divide should be simply respected rather than attempted to be bridged.