COVID-19 visitation bans for people in institutions put many at risk in other ways

This column is an opinionby Natalie Spagnuolo, PhD,and Michael Orsini. Spagnuolo teaches in Disability Studies at Carleton University and is co-director of Memory, Witness and Hope. Orsini is a professor atthe Institute of Feminist and Gender Studies and the School of Political Studies at the University of Ottawa, where he specializes in health policy and politics.For more information about CBC's Opinion section, please see theFAQ.

Disabled people know a lot about social isolation.

Many including those with intellectual and psychiatric disabilities are relying on the successof COVID-19 containment strategies, and lives are indeed at risk if they are not taken seriously.However, public health measures that restrict visiting rights to those in institutional settings areputting many at risk in other ways.

While public health principles have a rightful place in our decisions, so too do principles thatrecognize the humanity and dignity of people with disabilities.

As the COVID-19 crisis unfolds, recent decisions to implement visitation bans in group homes for people with intellectual disabilities, in psychiatric hospitals and wards, and in prisons, recall afamiliar and painful history for many disabled people. In these days of physical distancing, it isimportant to emphasize that this is one of the oldest public health measures aimed at"containing" the imagined threat of disability.

Many disabled people are already separated from non-disabled people. It is a legacy of eugenic segregation, which has been resisted by survivors of former government-run institutions forpeople with intellectual disabilities, such as Huronia and the Rideau Regional Centre in Ontario.

While there are legitimate reasons to think about and act collectively today to contain the spread of COVID-19, there are many "publics" who are ignored in our zeal to soothe thefears and concerns of otherwise healthy, and presumably non-disabled, people. When physical distancing is widely mobilized, other risks emerge for individuals already occupying a socially distant status.

Enough is enough, Trudeau toughens talk on isolation

4 years ago

Duration 1:58

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau toughened his language around self-isolation and social distancing while considering implementing the Emergencies Act.

Denying the vital supports provided by trusted people, including family and friends who may assist with decision-making and communication, constitutes not only a disruption or inconvenience, it creates an impossible situation for many. Without these "reasonable accommodations," some individuals with intellectual disabilities, for example, are left with little scope for advocacy in difficult situations, including if conflicts arise with staff members in theirplace of residence.

Some of these individuals do not have access to cellphones or the internet to stay connected with other people. Others, as a result of communication-related disabilities, may not be able touse phones, TTY, email or Skype.

And if the dark history of isolating disabled peoplehas taught us anything, it's that closedinstitutional settings breed violence. Survivor narratives are a painful reminder of environmentsmarked by physical, sexual and verbal abuse, and sometimes death.

These issues are already well known to many disability communities and organizations. Last week the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of persons with disabilities, Catalina Davindas,spoke about disabled people confined in institutions and prisons, drawing attention to howrestricting contact with trusted people can lead to "abuse or neglect."

The Council of Canadianswith Disabilities echoed this concern in a recent media statement calling for the inclusion of a "disability lens" in all COVID-19 planning.

We fully support recommendations made by the ARCH Disability Law Centre in Toronto, whichon March 24urged recognition of "caregivers and disability support staff as essential serviceproviders." ARCH also asked the government to work with provinces and territories to, "Ensurethat hospitals make an exception to any blanket prohibition of visitors when a person with adisability requires assistance with vital services like communication, caregiving, or supported decision making."

Such exceptions are equally important in group home settings.

Too soon to say how social distancing is affecting COVID-19 spread, OPH says

4 years ago

Duration 0:42

In a news conference conducted by telephone, Vera Etches, Ottawas chief medical officer of health, says a delay in getting test results and the continuing return of travellers from abroad make it too early to say how social distancing measures are affecting the spread of COVID-19.

In light of the 2019 passing of the Accessible Canada Act, the failure to consider the 22 per cent of Canadians with disabilities in the government response to COVID-19 is immensely disappointing. Emergency planning must equally recognize those disabled people without status, including disabled migrants who face the multiple risks outlined by the Migrant RightsNetwork, not least of which is the threat of detention and deportation if they seek medical care,and increased vulnerability to contracting COVID-19 if they are detained.

Government-mandated physical distancing for those already socially distant and made vulnerable by support systems, immigration and carceral policies, is harmful and surely not in the bestinterests of public health, unless disabled "publics" do not figure in our estimation of who counts.

We must take stock of differences in terms of impairment, and appreciate how gender, sexuality, race, class, language, migration status, and other factors shape disabled peoples'experiences with physical distancing.

Ottawa city manager explains why COVID-19 is different from other emergencies

4 years ago

Duration 0:41

In a news conference conducted by telephone Wednesday, Steve Kanellakos, city manager, says that with the social distancing measures required to stop the spread of COVID-19, communities arent able to pull together quite like they would in other emergencies.

Pundits will no doubt opine that these are extraordinary times, and as the argument goes, they justify extraordinary measures to protect the public. But for people with disabilities, their needscontinue to be exceptional in an age in which we aren't makingexceptions. This is the inevitablecircularity of pandemic logic, which is rooted in justifying actions that are outside of the typicallimits of legitimate state activity. But in pandemic times, we still need to take the time to thinkabout our ethical commitments to disabled people.

These include respecting a person's right to access trusted people who provide empowering supports. We can start by exempting these relationships from physical distancing measures.

Scholar Michael J. Prince reminds us that disabled people are "absent citizens," their power assumed to be non-existent. Politicians need not worry about their vote; most people can goabout their lives with limited concern for the livelihood of those who vacillate between beingregarded as objects of neglect and being looked upon with charity or pity. In either of theseformulations, there is limited space for imagining intellectually disabled people as rights-bearingindividuals who are flourishing, but it's something society must not forget.

Crises can bring out the best in people,and we have witnessed numerous examples during this pandemic, including the caremongering movement that has emerged in Canada to support disabled people, among others.

But it is critical in our crisis planning to consider the lives of disabled folks, whose connections tosociety matter now more than ever.

• This column is part of CBC's Opinion section. For more information about this section, please read ourFAQ.