Modern society: cruel, pitiless and heartless or full of TLC

Philosophy Forums Psychology and Mind
1

What a conceit modern society has of itself. This morning on the radio hands went up in horror at the way Victorians treated people with Down’s Syndrome, and yet the manner in which such people are treated today is the most APPALLING exercise of CRUELTY.

One of the guests on the show was an actress with Down’s Syndrome. (An actress?!!! Geez. They’ll be prime ministers and presidents next if modern society doesn’t get a grip of itself. And this may actually come to pass since modern society lost its grip on reality LONG ago.)

This Down’s Syndrome “actress” was busy telling listeners that the Victorians were appallingly cruel to people with her condition because they were treated as “insignificant”.

Actually, the “actress” could barely articulate, her words came mostly through her mother which begs the question: whose words and thoughts WERE they? In the first place, I really have a LOT of difficulty believing that the mother had anywhere approaching the kind of competence that would be required to suss what a Down’s syndrome person wants. Actually, I would go further: I KNOW that a Down’s Syndrome person would not want to be an actress. I KNOW that a Down’s syndrome person would not even want to have to deal with the real world in ANY form. Somebody who is disabled or wounded or otherwise under par is just like an animal in the same condition: they seek safety. They seek an environment where there are no threats and where they can cope. So WHO is the mother actually speaking for? For herself, of course. Like the mothers of many gifted children she wants to dine out on her daughter’s celebrity. It is the mother that the mother is concerned with and the daughter is merely a means to an end.

Another telling detail was the mother’s use of the word “insignificant”. Being “insignificant” was the gripe, and it is VERY telling. The emphasis is not on being in an environment in which someone with Down’s Syndrome can function (at the best level that their extremely limited abilities will allow), but on being SIGNIFICANT, on being NOTICED, on being IMPORTANT, or, to put it another way, on being a CELEBRITY. That’s what this Down’s Syndrome “actress” claims is important.

Let’s just get a grip on reality here. “Normal” people, that is YOU, can’t even cope in the modern world — you are living WAY beyond your competence — who of you can claim your life is free of fear of anxiety of worries of all sorts — so how the hell is someone with Down’s Syndrome supposed to be able to cope!!! The answer is: they can’t. In fact, it is an appalling cruelty to expose them to the modern world. It is an appalling cruelty to allow them to become “actresses”, to allow them to become “parents”etc, in fact, to allow them to have any sort of “normal” life at all. The Victorians had it right. People with Down’s Syndrome (and autism and many other mental dysfunctions) need to be “locked up”; that is, looked after in a VERY RESTRICTED, a VERY SIMPLE environment. For example, an environment in which they have a regular routine, in which they are not burdened with decision making such as “What colour t-shirt will I wear today?”, in which they are not constantly exposed to the unfamiliar etc, etc.

It is modern society that is cruel, callous and heartless, not the Victorians.

2

You are Josef Mengele, I gather…

the only words which I have for this are…

if I were to see you and to hear you utter these words, I might go up to you and I might kick you so hard - take a guess where - and you wouldn’t be able to think, walk or to speak or to feel anything except for deep pain coming from your useless so-called manhood (for what real woman would have you, especially since it would seem that that is where your brains are lodged) - and then I’d probably slap you hard across the face…that is, if my instinctive animal nature took over…which I could only hope that it would.

You see that pimple on your face? It has more awareness than do you.

3

There is no conflict with society “allowing” anyone to try to actualize their fullest potential. Society can’t help but mind what others do to some extent, being it’s interdependence, but where there is actualization going on, even if there are dangers then there is no need to be concerned. Exploitation is the antithesis to actualization. I couldn’t possible try to give some input on how to best manage social welfare, but what I do have a strong opinion on is giving parents the benefit of the doubt when it comes to their children. I’m not against social workers separating families on some conditions, but let’s keep in mind that a child separated from her family and placed in the care of others likely will do no better than languish (which I know you advocate for some). Actualization is more likely once independence is achieved. Worse case, though, the child will be exploited by the social worker, in the name of compassion, but actually for her career.

The autistic person in question is under the care of a parent who couldn’t possibly be exploiting her, unless you would claim that the only possibility for her actualization may be from her own independence. But, even that independence is one she must provide for herself, axiomatically.

Why would you prefer languishing as opposed to her only chance of actualization? It might be easier not to care at all. Most like to have this subject and related ones swept under the rug, and in the US/UK isn’t that usually the case? And not necessarily always for the worse, if homelessness was the only alternative. But, as a thinker, you cannot be unaware of the existence of the issues, so whatever your views, why be bothered when you are confronted by these issues in an innocuous way, such as through the radio?

4

[size=150]Life with Down syndrome is full of possibilities[/size]

Tim Norton was devastated when his daughter was diagnosed with Down syndrome shortly after her birth in 2006.

He envisioned her growing up tragically disabled. The years ahead seemed filled with darkness.

A chance encounter on a ski slope, just a few months after his daughter was born, changed Norton’s outlook on Down syndrome and the prospects for his daughter’s happiness.

While skiing near his home in Massachusetts, a gifted teenage skier with Down syndrome, Melissa Joy Reilly, glided past him at the crest of a hill.

Norton had noticed Reilly earlier in the day but said nothing.

"Melissa stopped in front of me and said, ‘Hello, how are you?’ " says Norton, of Westford, Mass. "I said, ‘Great. What a great night to be skiing.’ "

And, just like that, Norton’s life was changed.

“Without her even knowing it, without her even trying — it was quite remarkable — I got just the positive lift that I needed,” says Norton, whose daughter, Margaret, is now 7.

“She opened my eyes to what the possibilities could be for my daughter,” says Norton, a ski instructor. "It was like, ‘Wow, this isn’t a big black hole. This is a girl who can walk and talk and ski.’ "

STORY: With Down syndrome diagnoses, comes a wrenching choice

Like Norton, many people are surprised to learn of the dramatic improvements in health and quality of life for children and adults with Down syndrome.

Advocates for people with Down syndrome feel a new urgency to spread the word about these advances, as more women undergo prenatal tests for Down syndrome and other genetic conditions.

The lives of the 250,000 Americans with Down syndrome today are radically different than a generation ago, says Brian Skotko, co-director of the Down syndrome program at Massachusetts General Hospital.

People with Down syndrome now live to an average of 60 years, according to the national society. Just a generation ago, they lived to an average of only 25.

Many graduate high school. Some take college classes. Some get married. About one in five has a job, says pediatrician Kathryn Ostermaier, medical director of the Texas Children’s Hospital Down Syndrome Clinic.

On May 5, 36-year-old named Karen Gaffney will receive an honorary doctorate from Oregon’s University of Portland. University officials believe she may be the first person with Down syndrome to receive such a degree.

And the best may be yet to come, Skotko says. Thanks to early intervention, better therapies and educational opportunities, the generation of children with Down syndrome today may be the most accomplished ever, he says.

In March, a 15-year-old Oregon boy became one of the first people with Down syndrome to climb to a base camp on Mount Everest — a height of 17,600 feet.

Research by Skotko and others finds that life with Down syndrome is far happier — for parents, siblings and children themselves — than most imagine.

One of Skotko’s studies showed that among more than 2,000 parents on the mailing lists of Down syndrome organizations, only 4% of parents regretted having a child with the condition.

Nearly 99% of people with Down syndrome say they’re happy with their lives, and 96% say they like how they look, Skotko’s survey found. Among siblings, 88% say their brother or sister with Down syndrome has made them a better person. There’s a chance that these surveys paint an overly sunny picture, Skotko says, because people who belong to Down syndrome groups may be better off than those who lack this connection.

Advances in Down syndrome “need to be a part of prenatal counseling,” says Ostermaier, an assistant professor at Baylor College of Medicine. “As physicians, we’re supposed to give people accurate information so they can make informed decisions.”

Children with Down syndrome do face additional health challenges. They have a greater risk of respiratory problems, certain rare leukemias and are more likely to need surgery to correct bowel and colon problems.

About half of babies with Down syndrome are born with congenital heart defects. In the past, many died at birth. Today, surgeons can repair heart defects.

Children with Down syndrome today also can benefit from a variety of early interventions, she says. These include: physical therapy; occupational therapy; speech and language therapy; and feeding and swallowing therapy, to assist with problems caused by low muscle tone.

Because babies with Down syndrome tend to be “visual learners,” they can learn to communicate with sign language months or years before they master speech, Ostermaier says. Boston-area mom Melissa Coe is already teaching her daughter, 14-month-old Lily, to signs words such as “father.”

Specialized preschools also can help kids with Down syndrome make the transition to a regular kindergarten class, Ostermaier says.

New therapies may one day help alleviate some of the symptoms of Down syndrome, such as intellectual impairment, Ostermaier says. Preliminary clinical trials are now being done with drugs designed to improve memory and learning.

Reilly, now 26, illustrates what people with Down syndrome can accomplish when allowed to reach their full potential, Skotko says.

She remains an avid skier. In February, Reilly won a silver medal in the slalom competition at the Special Olympics World Winter Games in South Korea.

She often accompanies Skotko as he teaches doctors and medical students about Down syndrome.

Skotko says even doctors often know relatively little about Down syndrome. Surveys show that medical students and residents get little training on the condition.

It’s important, Skotko says, for people with Down syndrome to tell their own stories.

Skotko, whose sister has Down syndrome, credits her with teaching him lessons about patience, kindness and perseverance.

While learning to ride a bicycle was easy for him, Skotko says it took his sister three summers.

“She is a life coach for all of us in the family,” Skotko says. “She has taught us so many life lessons about how to be patient when the world wants the answer now, how to keep on going when others may quit.”

Reilly, who lives with her parents, is more active than most Americans: swimming, bicycling, even kayaking in Alaska.

She works as a teacher’s aide once a month. And she works for a state senator two days a week, taking the train into Boston by herself. She handles mailings, makes deliveries and answers phones.

“I love everything” about her job, Reilly says. "I have a lot of friends at work. They all think of me as part of the office …

“People with Down syndrome and other developmental disabilities are very can-do people,” Reilly says. “They are very able.”

Norton, who has gotten to know Reilly and her family well, says she continues to inspire him:

“I hope my daughter grows up to be just like her.”

There’s a lot of unawareness which floats around. I wonder why that is? We see what is APPALLING in others because then we don’t have to face it ourselves. Back then, many people were a lot less unenlightened than we at least ought to be today. But this IS an individual thing. You would think that in living in this day and age, one could see possibilities.

But then, the Victorians did have more of a reason, though not condoning it…we had not progressed at that time to the point where we have today and evidently we have still not progressed so far…
We still do the same thing with individuals. If they appear to have no usefulness or value, they are less than human in our eyes.

Speak to the individual, not the whole.
Aside from which we are ALL OF US animals. A person with Down’s Syndrome is no more or less different, except for I.Q. and medical characteristics, than any other individual who would or might want to seek safety and an environment where they can cope, especially with the outlook of many who are . And I daresay that their emotional quotient might be higher than yours and mine together.
Always ook to the individual. But you may agree that there are many with Down’s syndrome who want to flourish and to grow and who have more courage, who seek to live the most quality life which they have the ability to. …more so than others who may have more ability. All it takes is encouragement and the capacity to want more and to be more.

We can’t really know, can we, just how far someone’s Will and desire can take them, can we?

Apparently you have no children so you may have no idea at all of the pride and the love which may be in the heart of that mother. It’s true that there are parents who look on their gifted children as extentions of their selves - they see their own achievement through the child, they live vicariously through that child, and not the achievement of the child and I daresay that might come from something lacking in the parent, not enough self esteem or self value, but I would say that when it comes to a mother with a child who has Down’s Syndrome, or one who in your archaic awareness, dragon, or your such esteemed thinking, is not so normal, who has grown so much in capability, and continues to, that achievement and all that that child has accomplished, in the mother’s eyes, belongs to that child.

Well, it seems as though the Victorian age has been revisited upon us…but this we already know.
It also seems that we have re-visted Aucshwitz.

5

If you’re Loki, dragon, take care you do not end up like him.

6

The most interesting part of this to me is one question that screams from the OP…
What causes bigotry?
We can also ask why do people wrap themselves with bigoted ideas? What benefits do they get?

7 
 In my opinion bigotry is manifold, Kris. One it is basic psych: blaming another group for something , usually the most vulnerable, for their own shortcomings.  These may include repressed petty hates, un admitted jealousy, and the need to affiliate with an opinion, in order to belong.

Bigotry has rewards, belonging to a group has benefits, in case of extreme tension , it can avoid being carried away by the political foe, in the middle of the night. Membership can offer quirky freebies such as promotions, monetary grants, and feelings of belonging.

8

I do believe you nailed it obe. It could also have added a very primitive drive or drives. Those that are bigoted may well be genetic throwbacks to primitive humans. One child in a family of multiple kids can show this even though they were raised in the same way. The reverse occurs also.
Could genetics play a significant part?

9

I’ve worked with some of the members of an all developmentally disabled group of actors and this included people with Down’s. They definitely enjoyed acting and understood that they were pretending, taking on roles to entertain.
I suppose I have a similar reaction to the scene as you describe it, not the acting part, but the ‘political’ advocate aspects of it. Soemthing I often feel when I hear children espousing some political position, young children that is. It often sounds like mom and dad are being channeled.

Of course this probably is the case at any age for many people. Or they are channeling some other authority figure.

But as far as wanting to act, that doesn’t strike me as odd at all.

10

Kriswest

It could begin with the parents. Usually everything does, doesn’t it? The young mind becomes infiltrated with false propaganda, negative impressions and so everything which that mind sees growing up confirms what the parents have said, because its been conditioned to believe in that way, no matter what 'something else" tells them. And it has to be true, because their mommy and daddy are always right. Bigotry is like a virus.

It also stems from a lack of the capability to see a larger picture, a lack of a sense of inter-connectedness, and just plain laziness to try to be more aware.

Better than thou, holier than thou. Bigotry is like a cocoon in a way which people do “wrap themselves” within as you said. It’s safe in that coccoon and it grows out of and stems from an unconscious fear, in my book, to accept the fact that we as humans are weak at times, imperfect always. We are so inane that we judge who we are by the color of our skin. Yet we love the rainbow, don’t we? We do not understand that there really are no mistakes, we are simply an ongoing process of human evolution and perhaps we simply cannot understand that within diversity itself is actually perfection.

Many of us drive through tunnels - more so than open highways.

11

I was moved emotionally by Tod Brownings’ pre-talkie movie “Freaks”. It made me wonder what becomes of such people now that its politically incorrect to show them off in carnival side shows.

12

Moreno

True - like a philosopher. :evilfun:

13

Now that it is “politically incorrect” to show them off in carnival side shows, they are shown off on the stage, on the ski slopes etc, etc. This is typical of our society: it finds ways of white-washing its vicious behaviour. Dress up the gladiatorial fighting as athletic competition and transfer to the killing from the physical to the psychological realm and Hey, Presto! we have become angels instead of devils. So now the devils who would have shown the disabled in freak shows have now become the angels who give them scope to “actualize” themselves, but they are still playing the same game at the cost of the disabled.

14

Your reactions to the post are highly emotional. In other words, you are allowing yourselves to be dictated to by your emotions AND to be emotionally manipulated. So there is no point in my taking the arguments or criticisms seriously: they are just the result of emotional manipulation practiced on you by others.

15

Your OP is highly emotional, and factually incorrect. It also reveals more about you than about the subject it purports to address.

It’s not a good thing.

16

You are suffering from homoglyphic confusion. When you read a novel, and the language becomes hysterical, I take it you would not suppose the novelist to be hysterical in the writing. In fact, the novelist had to LEARN how to write like an hysterical person. I would not claim that I had to learn how to write like an angry person. Rather, that I have learned to control my emotions and am now, consequently, free to write as I wish, free to be creative, free to write in any lingo etc, etc. Those who have learned to govern their emotions will find that they benefit in an increased awareness of what is going on with other people. So, for example, it would be perfectly apparent to them when a person is writing in a very STRONG, CLEAR, SIMPLE, UNAMBIGUOUS, UP-FRONT way and when a person is writing under the influence of their emotions.

17

He said that the OP was highly emotional (and he was correct), not that the OPer was.

The OPer, on the other hand, perhaps suffering from homoglyphic sensitivity (mild Dorian Gray syndrome, very common these days) presumed the guilt that she was hoping to see was not her own, but that other person’s and thereby causing her guilt (refusing to see oneself clearly for fear of not being innocent enough… hiding from one’s own feared true picture).

A little excessive anger helps to remove the confusion brought on by the insecurity and thus allows for a moment of higher performance through blindness from the fear, although generally leads to creating even more reasons to fear.

18

Dragon, my friend, I was trying to make conversation, I still am. You have issue that they are exposed and you make a good argument that they are exposed now through more subtle techniques than before. I think it is worth noting the difference between the old exploitation and the new. In the old people would be tossed aside once their exploitative use was over, now they will not be. But, the tossing aside I speak of only refers to homelessness or the lack of even a semblance of most of the basic necessities (food, descent shelter, health care, and at least a chance at socialization).

The fact of the matter is that mentally disabled people are always at risk of suffering. Before modern society it was practically a given, now more due to their potential being stifled. Modern society gives off the pretense that everyone can be actualized. And in a sense it is true that anyone can be actualized, but the odds are very low for the vast majority of people in general. Basically as to where it used to be that the chance of actualization for one with a mental disability would approach zero and for one who may claim to have been born with and into an average (for the first world, because this is all this is about, if we were having an honest discussion about the third world, one without denial, we would still be trying to decide whether we want to die in a self annihilating rush towards altruism, languish in pure nihilism, or stop giving a damn in general) situation would have very small odds as to be expected. Now the odds are simply low for all involved, worse still for those with a mental disability but not nearly as worse as before.

If people in modern society really wish to give everyone an equal chance at actualization then that means that their attitudes towards everyone must become equal. To put it in the most painful manner (for those stuck in denial) if one isn’t yet married and expects to be someday then they should expect that they could as easily be married to someone classified as mentally disabled or any other classification (extremely disfigured for one) than they would be to someone with a classification such as good-looking-smart-nice-employed. It isn’t so, to know how people’s attitudes towards others differ one only need to look around or go through any official book of statistics out there.

The best one can say is “we’re not there yet, but we’re getting there.” Ok, as a society we are getting there, soon very few will discriminate against anyone, for any reason, pertaining to any aspect of their, or the other’s, life. But, to expect society to get there wouldn’t one have to first expect there to be at least a few whose attitude had already obtained this state? And far be it from me to ask for an example of this attitude in practice, I would naively only ask to hear someone admit to it in principal (as in, “I didn’t marry one who has a disability, even though I was asked repeatedly, and I happen to be married to a good-looking-smart-nice-employed person, but that is only coincidental being that what I really did to decide was look into each person’s heart, and could I help it if the glsne-person had one more suited for me???”).

The real issue here is that people in modern society are going to suffer as they always have and certain classifications of people are going to suffer more than others on average like they always have and few if any in society really has a legitimate concern over this issue (being that it would be entirely unnatural), so why are you concerned with this issue dragon, the ephemeral notion of exploitation, in a specific sense - here: speaking of those with down syndrome - where the exploited have at least chance at actualization? Personally, I show no concern to any of this, but it only seems logical for one who has concern to relativize it.

And I don’t mean a real relativation based on who has it worse and where one help can the most with the least effort (the third world always being the answer). I simply mean a relativation based on one’s personal sensibilities. I applaud those who hate the poverty they see on their own street more than on the other side of the world (not that I care about either). But, it’s not just about what’s in front of your face it’s about situations that may potentially affect you. If I had to be concerned about anything, I would be more concerned that I may one day have a relation with Down syndrome, who would have little chance at actualization, than I am at whatever horrors are going on thousands of miles a way. I hate the idea of languishing worse than immediate danger. But, you support languishing for those with mental disabilities rather than the dangers of having to deal with a world that is too complex for most everyone, let alone them. Why? If you wish anyone to languish rather than to live and possibly die, then how can you not support it for all (and I only ask hypothetically, I know you aren’t personally languishing anyway, so I know you don’t support languishing for yourself). Is this your subtle way of saying you’re against the trend towards less discrimination? If so then just say it, say you think less of those with Down syndrome and don’t want them to be given a chance to compete amongst others, in what could be said with an “artificial” advantage. Better yet, just be apathetic. Ask yourself this; if you were a potential actress, would you be concerned with competing with those with Down syndrome for a job?

19

dragon

We’re still the devils, too, dragon. Anyway, it may not be the same devils who are pretending to care by being “politically correct”. And perhaps you would have to ask the disabled and others who were at one time taken advantage of ~~~~ how THEY REALLY FEEL and not to assume anything.

Would you want to keep someone from becoming more actualized and have more of a quality of life simply become you do not trust the devils out there or their motives? One can make lemonade out of lemons you know.

Also, do you not intuit or see the possibility of remorse and redemption in human beings, dragon? We are capable of “evolving” in different ways and becoming. We are a process - animal into human animal, flowing and ebbing, climbing and falling.

Sometimes “something” happens and someone will become self-aware, will see suddenly something, have an ephiphany, if you will, that they have done which becomes in their mind a terrible thing and they want to change that. Some might call it grace - some might call it an uprising of conscience or a new consciousness taking over.

What is the cost to the disabled that you see?

20

OK, wasn’t it you in Another thread who was suggesting we did not need to Control our natures? But here you seem to be saying that you Control a significant part of yours - your emotions. Even going so far as to imply (strongly) that it is a negative when someone is Writing under the influence of their emotions. In nature, of course, the emotions of animals influence their behavior. Why have you decided that nature is wrong in this case?