‘Not disabled enough’: Episodic disabilities and the Ontario Disability Support Program

Abstract

<p>Persons living with episodic disabilities who apply for long-term income assistance in Ontario, Canada are often denied eligibility because of the questionable legitimacy of their shifting medical conditions. Since there are no official categories for persons with episodic disabilities to fit in because they are not entirely well (and employable) nor entirely sick (and unemployable), they are judged as ‘not disabled enough’ within the existing parameters of assistance. Drawing on a series of longitudinal, semi-structured interviews with eight respondents in Toronto, all of whom applied for, but were denied, long-term assistance, we examine the tension between how episodic disabilities are embodied versus the manner in which ‘disability status’ is legislatively constructed. Implications reconsidering the logistics of fixed categories and strategies addressing the wider spectrum of the experience of disability for policy are addressed.</p> <p>Keywords: disability, episodic, Ontario Disability Support Program, ODSP, definitions, embodiment, legitimate</p>

When bodies do not fit: an analysis of postgraduate fieldwork

“…These conditions include the vast array of illness covering fluctuations in chronic pain, emotional distress, cognitive impairment, neurological impairment, and severe fatigue (e.g. Lightman et al 2009;Davidson and Henderson 2010;Pilling 2013). Invisible disabilities have been also called hidden, episodic, and medium-term disabilities in relationship to the uneven manifestations of illness, some of which come under the wider umbrella term of contested illness (Moss and Teghtsoonian 2008).…”

Resisting the Tick Box: Reflexive Use of Educational Technologies in Developing Student Identities and Challenging Higher Education Constructions of Disability Based on Notions of Conformity and Consistency

“…Firstly, actual estimates of the prevalence of fluctuating or recurring impairments are difficult to establish, largely because comparability between different geographical and cultural groups in epidemiology studies can be problematic (for example, Working Group on CFS/ME, 2002); and secondly, because of the very nature of the types of impairment under study, definitive inclusion/exclusion criteria are often not possible to identify or are overly complex, and again are difficult to draw conclusive, comparable results from (Working Group on CFS/ME, 2002). Lightman, Vick, Herd, and Mitchell's (2009) application of queer theory to the concept of fluctuating or recurring conditions highlights on-going "precarious bodies" and "fluid identities" that enable people with complex and fluctuating impairments to transition between different understandings and constructions of self. This adds additional difficulty in bounding groups of students in different categories, in that people with fluctuating or recurring impairments experience ongoing and dynamic fluctuations in self:…”

Are some disabilities more equal than others? Conceptualising fluctuating or recurring impairments within contemporary legislation and practice

“…In framing this discussion, this paper considers the prolific work currently being undertaken in Canada (O'Brien et al 2008(O'Brien et al , 2009McKee 2007;Lightman et al 2009;Vickers 2001) in modelling what have been termed episodic disabilities, and the impact that this research has had/can have on clarifying understanding of the associated impact where potential for impairments to vary over time exists. In particular, attention will be drawn to the possible applicability of the episodic disabilities framework (EDF) (O'Brien et al 2008) for improving understanding of students' experiences of learning and teaching in higher education.…”

“…Research has been undertaken regarding employment rights and access to benefits of people with fluctuating conditions (McKee 2007;Lightman et al 2009;Vickers 2001) and, again, the term episodic disabilities has been applied with illustrative effect. Indeed, the Episodic Disabilities Employment Network and the Episodic Disabilities Network are both well established, and the active consortia of organisations, including the prolific Canadian Working Group on HIV and Rehabilitation (CWGHR), for whom improving understanding and awareness of impairments that vary in intensity is core.…”

“…The scepticism that has already been noted with regard to the legitimation of many fluctuating or recurring conditions is echoed in the Canadian perspective; Sherry L. Peters refers to the perception of some disabled people 'having a disability "sometimes"' (1993), and Lightman et al (2009) note the 'questionable legitimacy' afforded to episodic disabilities within the context of policy for income assistance. This 'otherness' regarding fluctuating or recurring conditions, in defining episodic disabilities outside the confines of what is 'traditional', is a key feature of the work of Andrea Vick and Ernie Lightman (2010).…”