Alter-European Journal of Disability Research最新文献

In 1924, the law on “compulsory employment of disabled soldiers” was passed in France, which forced companies with more than 10 employees to employ at least 10% of WW1 disabled veterans. This law is discussed since 1916 and will not be applied until 1928. It gives rise to many oppositions, particularly from employers. They estimate that 10% is a too high rate, which does not correspond to the real employment needs of war disabled. The aim of this article is to show how statistical ignorance plays a fundamental role in the opposition to the compulsory employment of war cripples. It is based on the incapacity of public authorities to evaluate the number of unemployed disabled veternans. Thus, the rate of 10% is considered arbitrary. Ignorance is not only a weakness for the application of a voluntarist public policy but it is also an argument used by opponents of this law.

Cet article s’intéresse aux politiques d’assistance aux mutilés de guerre de l’Empire colonial français. Ces politiques sont le résultat d’un ensemble d’actions et d’interactions entre de multiples acteurs, à savoir les ministères (colonies, affaires étrangères, travail, pensions), les parlementaires, l’Office National des Mutilés, les associations de mutilés de guerre et les hauts fonctionnaires coloniaux. Fondé sur de multiples archives, sur les revues associatives et la presse coloniale, cet article analyse le statut concédé aux mutilés de guerre de ces territoires. Constituent-ils, du fait de leur sacrifice pour la Patrie, des « créanciers » égaux à ceux de la métropole ? Nos recherches permettent de dresser le constat d’une extrême hétérogénéité des politiques d’assistance dans l’Empire colonial, avec de fortes inégalités territoriales et ethniques dans l’attribution des différentes prestations. Les mutilés de guerre de l’Empire bénéficient d’une partie non négligeable des droits conférés à ceux de la métropole (y compris les droits économiques). Les mutilés français et indigènes d’Afrique du Nord et des quatre communes du Sénégal bénéficient d’une pension relativement similaire à celle des mutilés en France. Dans les autres colonies, les mutilés indigènes sont discriminés et perçoivent des pensions d’un montant très inférieur. Dans tous les territoires de l’Empire, les mutilés indigènes ont un accès restreint aux emplois administratifs et aux prêts agricoles. Cette politique sociale, coûteuse pour la métropole, s’avère prioritaire en raison de l’impératif politique de reconnaissance envers ceux qui se sont sacrifiés pour la patrie, mais aussi et surtout pour conserver la sympathie des populations colonisées et le soutien politique des mutilés et des anciens combattants dans un contexte de nationalisme anticolonial croissant.

This article focuses on the policies to assist war-disabled men in the various territories of the Empire. Policies to assist the war-disabled men were the result of a set of evolving actions and interactions between multiple actors with extremely unequal resources: ministries (War, Colonies, Foreign Affairs, Labour, Pensions); parliamentarians; the National Office of the Disabled; associations of war-disabled and senior colonial officials. Based on multiple archives, associative journals and the colonial press, this article aims to analyse the status granted to war-disabled in these territories. By virtue of their sacrifice for the Fatherland, did they deserve credit equal to those from Metropolitan France? The research shows the extreme heterogeneity of the assistance policies in the colonial Empire, with strong territorial and ethnic inequalities in the allocation of the various services. The Empire's war-disabled men enjoyed a range of rights almost similar to those of Metropolitan France (including economic rights) a few years after those of France. The French and indigenous war-disabled in North Africa and the four municipalities of Senegal had a pension relatively similar than that of the war-disabled of France. In all other colonies, indigenous war-disabled were severely discriminated against, they only had a pension that was much lower than that of the French disabled. Throughout the Empire, indigenous war-disabled had less access to administrative jobs, agricultural land and bank loans. This social policy, which was costly for France, was a priority because of the political imperative of showing gratitude for those who sacrificed themselves for the country, but also and above all to maintain the backing of the colonized populations and the political support of the disabled and former combatants in a context of growing anti-colonial nationalism.

This article explores the creation of a new social welfare system for physically disabled veterans and civilians of the Great War in Belgium during the early interwar period. Through an analysis of debates among ministers and legislators, doctor's opinions and the member's periodicals of the two largest national associations for war-wounded veterans and civilians it examines how these actors shaped a new set of benefits that caused significant socio-economic inequalities inside and between both groups of victims and in relation to physically disabled citizens without war injuries. Consequently, this article reveals how the welfare system characterised a reimagining of war compensation, the physically disabled worker and disability equality in Belgium.

This paper explores different meanings of being social among autistic people who are employed at an autistic-separate workplace in Sweden. The analyses in this paper are based on data from fieldwork at an autistic workspace consisting of autistic people working with peer support directed at young autistic adults in Sweden. Two different forms of sociality, which take place in two different social environments, are highlighted: environments dominated by non-autistic people and those dominated by autistic people. Interest-based sociality includes the importance of having interest-based exchanges with one another, and having common interests and communication based on genuine interest in the topic being discussed. Socially based sociality is, rather, based on social group identification. The first is the dominant form of sociality among the participants, which they connect with being in an autistic space. The second may be viewed as a counter-dominant form of sociality among the participants, which they connect with being in spaces dominated by non-autistic people.

Electoral system reforms in liberal democracies have allowed people with intellectual disabilities, historically stripped of their citizenship, to exercise their political rights. Inspired by the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, many national governments have extended the principle of the universal right to vote to persons with intellectual disabilities, despite some institutional resistance. Different approaches in ethics and political theory have offered justifications for these electoral reforms, but they are divided on the question of the skills required for the exercise of political rights and the constraints imposed by the intellectual abilities of certain people. The concept of vulnerability developed by Martha Fineman approaches the question differently by emphasizing the relational and collaborative dimensions of the citizenship institution.