Inclusion as heterotopia: Spaces of encounter between people with and without intellectual disability

Abstract

The public space to which -in line with common definitions of inclusion -persons with intellectual disability are designated often turns out to be a space of discrimination. The aim of this study is to identify spaces of encounter. Michel Foucault's concept of heterotopia -'other spaces'and its subsequent interpretations are used as an analytical tool for evaluating efforts to include persons with intellectual disability in society. In Foucault's work 'space' refers to geographical places and to 'sites' that can be defined by sets of relations. Among these spaces are 'counter-sites' like large scale residential facilities for people with intellectual disability. Though policies of deinstitutionalisation aim at erasure of these places of exclusion, the results are often disappointing, largely because these policies ignore the analysis of power dynamics that install exclusionary processes and structures. Recent interpretations of the concept of heterotopia position the 'other places' in the middle of ordinary life as social spaces of encounter and dialogue between the 'normal' and the 'abnormal'. Characteristics and practical conditions of such spaces of encounter are explored. These interpretations open up a new conceptualisation of inclusion in terms of niches in which encounter and dialogue are cultivated and an alternative social ordering can be exercised.

Social enterprises as spaces of encounter for mental health consumers

“…() suggest that a focus on disabled people's encounters with unknown others offers a useful way to think about the small, but significant, moments of connection that can – but do not necessarily – add up to participation in the life of a community. Encounters thus offer both a potential starting point for longer term relationships as well as an important form of social contact in their own right (also Meininger ). Similarly, Ootes et al .…”

“…It is also true in relation to the social/relational context for encounter. Meininger (, 30) notes that there is a prevailing expectation in mainstream settings that disabled people can and will conform to ‘the mould of the modern self‐confident assertive citizen’ who acts, communicates and responds to cues in ways that approximate non‐disabled norms (also Hansen and Philo ; Davidson ). The emphasis on interactional norms connects with the kinds of activities and roles available to disabled people.…”

Neighbourhood social inclusion from the perspective of people with intellectual disabilities: Relevant themes identified with the use of photovoice

“…However, this depends on whether society's ideas about what is "normal" have changed, and whether (and to what extent) people labelled with intellectual disabilities in fact meet, connect and associate with other people (Meininger, 2013). Living in these ordinary neighbourhoods, might offer opportunities for social inclusion.…”

“…In itself, spatial location (or relocation), does not seem to be a sufficient condition for realizing social inclusion (Meininger, 2013). Until now, the movement from institutions to neighbourhoods has been mainly a physical development, and the desired social change has not occurred.…”

“…This might be because inclusion policies ignore the exclusion faced by people with intellectual disabilities in society. They may have left the geographical places of exclusion, but the discriminatory context into which they move remains unchanged, and they are still regarded as "other" (Hall, 2005;Meininger, 2013). Spaces are more organized in a way that allows people with intellectual disabilities to live in the presence of others.…”