Direct Action: ADAPT at the White House, Tony Attwood Update
Published April 30, 2009 @ 09:54AM PT
[Ed. Two guests today, here's the first--]
Throughout the history of civil rights movements, direct action such as a street protest or sit-in has been widely used to draw public attention to injustice and the failure to correct it. A century before ADAPT members chained themselves to the White House fence demanding that President Obama keep his campaign promise to quickly pass the Community Choice Act, suffragists did the same as part of their efforts to gain voting rights for women. Labor organizers walked the picket lines and, in the early days of unions, often were beaten by police and by management's hired thugs. Black civil rights activists marched for equality and sat defiantly in the front of the bus, knowing that they were likely to be jailed.
All of these struggles were criticized at one time or another for being overly dramatic and going too far. Protesters often were told that they should just be more patient and wait for gradual changes to take place, instead of being so confrontational. The same argument sometimes is made today.
What the critics overlook, however, is that by the time activists engage in direct action, their attempts to discuss the issues politely and quietly have already been ignored for a very long time. Disability rights advocates have been trying to pass the Community Choice Act, or similar legislation, for the past 40 years. Their efforts have gotten nowhere because politicians did not expect any consequences for their failure to treat disability rights as a priority issue.
Likewise, the Autistic Self Advocacy Network's recent decision to take direct action against professionals who associate with dangerous hate groups was taken only after many years of our community's concerns being ignored. Waiting for gradual change has not gotten us anywhere. The hate groups have only grown bolder in their attempts to incite prejudice and discrimination in family law and other areas.
Accordingly, in a protest on April 24th at a presentation by Dr. Tony Attwood, leaflets were handed out explaining the damage done by hate groups such as FAAAS and the ongoing campaign to put an end to it. Similar protests at future events will continue until Dr. Attwood publicly withdraws his support for hate groups and apologizes for the harm done to our community.
For more information, please read these recent blog posts about the Community Choice Act protest and about ASAN's End The Hate campaign, and visit the following action pages:
Community Choice Act in Health Care Reform!
Pass the Community Choice Act with Comprehensive Health Care Reform!
Tell Tony Attwood and Isabelle Hénault to disassociate themselves from hate groups
Share this Post
Related Posts
-
Excluded from Health Care Reform--And from Civil Rights
-
Just Because I'm Quiet Doesn't Mean I Don't Understand
-
Sexual Rights, Sexual Abuse, and the Question of Consent
Comments (1)
Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.
Author
-
Meg Evans, a board member of the Autistic Self Advocacy Network, is currently employed in the legal publishing industry. She is a licensed attorney in the State of Ohio and received her law degree from Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio. She and her husband, who have two children, celebrated their 20th anniversary last year. Meg was identified as autistic in early childhood, and several of her family members are on the autistic spectrum.
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Email


















"Waiting for gradual change has not gotten us anywhere. The hate groups have only grown bolder in their attempts to incite prejudice and discrimination in family law and other areas."
Absolutely! If a little comprimise is a condecending attempt to silence the critics, the critics need to get more critical.
People don't achieve the power to make decisions for others without our support and they shouldn't be allowed to delude themselves into believing they will keep it without our support either.
When the dicrimination is radical, the ones who are less affected need to hear about it so the approach to comabating needs to be radical too!
Posted by Ed none on 04/30/2009 @ 04:02PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.