bplist00w_WebSubresources_WebMainResource( #$()-.2378<=ABFGKLPTX\`dhijklmqrs _WebResourceResponse_WebResourceData^WebResourceURL_WebResourceMIMETypeOCbplist00 Y$archiverX$versionT$topX$objects_NSKeyedArchiver _WebResourceResponse )/078?GOZNS.objectsWNS.keys@ABCDEFHIJKLMN VServer]Last-Modified]Accept-RangesZConnectionTDate^Content-Length\Content-Type_Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1_Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:09:45 GMTTnoneUclose_Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:05:52 GMTT148112^__`6_NSMutableDictionary\NSDictionary12bcc6_NSHTTPURLResponseInternal12effg6_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse$)2DILbd+-/1  "0>IN]j  (-1EhSOJFIFHHC  !"$"$Cp"6u34q ?G l=TOY3UAδמ}n -3U@My7񺀚P?_Thttp://infotrac.galegroup.com.proxy2.library.uiuc.edu/it/images/english/spgnofr3.jpgZimage/jpegOBbplist00 Y$archiverX$versionT$topX$objects_NSKeyedArchiver _WebResourceResponse )/078?GOZNS.objectsWNS.keys@ABCDEFHIJKLMN VServer]Last-Modified]Accept-RangesZConnectionTDate^Content-Length\Content-Type_Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1_Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:09:45 GMTTnoneUclose_Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:05:52 GMTT261012^__`6_NSMutableDictionary\NSDictionary12bcc6_NSHTTPURLResponseInternal12effg6_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse$)2DILbd+-/1  !/=HM\i ',0DhRO 2GIF89aUN^8rVba[eNDZbsU4,gA}K^ldc`baaec`feddchgkhrՑcfĪlisLqr~{hHi#˪5:,U@% -.- #1699;>?84/Ɖ1:;?4&6::776;97559>=2➔/<5>v"@B$$8XPÇ! --uׯGAܕ"?TI bAX% ɳ HѢC99ʧr&Jj&VA5D'@a%6x80A]SP)ZHl!a_VȠ(e@ _.pEov '4(qȆG>6'obe$#FpN 1jܨ7y`>HYj70D-#DȠyH,8"=uD @#)`2!ɁEu@饗DH)@pp*`!e *f\!P^aB @ .d/ W *0'm g 7vƜꪬ>8 kӵ\& C 6l]-6-  5 p/X !%(&hO5`Bݢ g2լ@$ BEKb hR0$H,M$CdžTp4LJ#s@?3!56@)t :&4tHF׾Cc@u* `@.lL tEfS >(A@+8NTH N`Sh L 8e `,'{ H"6%@"pΈ! F `Z#qil  em1^6o@#<[ iT@e#ŏf7B2`Wc \zNhE(ZϨ7KN  `1WCWֈ.fBԚ- ЀjF d+:*2Ȅ+ x-V-؀$"<"T U$0K3$hy2|k"bTY5I-Պ1EPS>çA"y-dPEP@( ҹ)`C%NX`?B!F`@K6% V 1Z#u H̶7P|EAL³n!`׉z@2Ӗ!K&E{{ XЁm ;0V?#|thql[G$M<`9G0)H;H` Kg=f. zv|0P;^Z`I XE^]<-! f;HI9ݓg(o0z5}T>S (7L_dhOՄW}OM~l|Tߗ 1 `eNNJ,"&5A;_Thttp://infotrac.galegroup.com.proxy2.library.uiuc.edu/it/images/english/itcustom.gifYimage/gifOFbplist00 Y$archiverX$versionT$topX$objects_NSKeyedArchiver _WebResourceResponse )/078?GOZNS.objectsWNS.keys@ABCDEFHIJKLMN VServer]Last-Modified]Accept-RangesZConnectionTDate^Content-Length\Content-Type_Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1_Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:09:45 GMTTnoneUclose_Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:05:52 GMTS11512^__`6_NSMutableDictionary\NSDictionary12bcc6_NSHTTPURLResponseInternal12effg6_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse$)2DILbd *,.0&4BMRan +04HhVOsGIF89a!,@."ajX;;;;I+{^(Nڵ䨮l{*7}p;[;_Zhttp://infotrac.galegroup.com.proxy2.library.uiuc.edu/it/images/english/slwhite_box_22.gifOIbplist00 Y$archiverX$versionT$topX$objects_NSKeyedArchiver _WebResourceResponse )/078?GOZNS.objectsWNS.keys@ABCDEFHIJKLMN VServer]Last-Modified]Accept-RangesZConnectionTDate^Content-Length\Content-Type_Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1_Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:09:45 GMTTnoneUclose_Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:25:41 GMTS29412^__`6_NSMutableDictionary\NSDictionary12bcc6_NSHTTPURLResponseInternal12effg6_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse$)2DILbd+-/1  ")7EPUdq .37KhYO&GIF89apk΀!,p` dihlp,tmx| Q\r4596ncDUua: W%; w$\uQt|>gy%sFuO=ex\c{,Vc<~EovP0:3!;_\http://infotrac.galegroup.com.proxy2.library.uiuc.edu/it/images/english/cus_help_article.gifOGbplist00 Y$archiverX$versionT$topX$objects_NSKeyedArchiver _WebResourceResponse )/078?GOZNS.objectsWNS.keys@ABCDEFHIJKLMN VServer]Last-Modified]Accept-RangesZConnectionTDate^Content-Length\Content-Type_Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1_Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:09:45 GMTTnoneUclose_Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:05:53 GMTS98312^__`6_NSMutableDictionary\NSDictionary12bcc6_NSHTTPURLResponseInternal12effg6_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse$)2DILbd+-/1 '5CNSbo ,15IhWOGIF89ap3f3k3f333ff3fffff3f̙3f3f3333f3333333333f333333f3f33f3ff3f3f33333f33̙33333f3333333f333ff3fffff3f3f33ff3f3f3fffff3fffffffffff3ffff̙fff3fffffff3fffff3f3333f333ff3fffff3f̙̙̙3̙f̙̙̙3f3f̙3333f3̙33ff3fff̙ff3f̙̙3f̙3f̙3f3333f333ff3fffff3f̙3f3f!,pH*\ȰÇ#JHŋ3jȱǏ CIɓ\y@@]*&B(3$(sgJ }HJ=YѦBJ,jӘ@}UjDX&]ZpkV^{NU٦j[aDwúcڭiw_kVeҺ#KL˘3k̹c@;_Zhttp://infotrac.galegroup.com.proxy2.library.uiuc.edu/it/images/english/cus_title_list.gif !"OCbplist00 Y$archiverX$versionT$topX$objects_NSKeyedArchiver _WebResourceResponse )/078?GOZNS.objectsWNS.keys@ABCDEFHIJKLMN VServer]Last-Modified]Accept-RangesZConnectionTDate^Content-Length\Content-Type_Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1_Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:09:45 GMTTnoneUclose_Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:05:53 GMTS20612^__`6_NSMutableDictionary\NSDictionary12bcc6_NSHTTPURLResponseInternal12effg6_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse$)2DILbd *,.0 #1?JO^k  (-1EhSOGIF89az---!,z@Uڋ޼H扦ʶ L׎ DL*̦ JԪ5jܮ rN ;dihlp,tmx|pH,Ȥrl:ШtJZsvzװxL.zn|N;_Whttp://infotrac.galegroup.com.proxy2.library.uiuc.edu/it/images/english/cus_toc_div.gif%&'OGbplist00 Y$archiverX$versionT$topX$objects_NSKeyedArchiver _WebResourceResponse )/078?GOZNS.objectsWNS.keys@ABCDEFHIJKLMN VServer]Last-Modified]Accept-RangesZConnectionTDate^Content-Length\Content-Type_Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1_Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:09:45 GMTTnoneUclose_Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:25:41 GMTS28412^__`6_NSMutableDictionary\NSDictionary12bcc6_NSHTTPURLResponseInternal12effg6_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse$)2DILbd+-/1 '5CNSbo ,15IhWOGIF89aD̙f3,DI8͋(`(dihj|i t-Gu`HNaI ݂TjDBLw&l66=I)6 ΢&us-x ;`#_Xr\#{C~ne%}"w@!9nLźM>BΛͶ4Ԋ1#j;_Zhttp://infotrac.galegroup.com.proxy2.library.uiuc.edu/it/images/english/cus_rfmt_print.gif*+,OGbplist00 Y$archiverX$versionT$topX$objects_NSKeyedArchiver _WebResourceResponse )/078?GOZNS.objectsWNS.keys@ABCDEFHIJKLMN VServer]Last-Modified]Accept-RangesZConnectionTDate^Content-Length\Content-Type_Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1_Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:09:45 GMTTnoneUclose_Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:25:41 GMTT104412^__`6_NSMutableDictionary\NSDictionary12bcc6_NSHTTPURLResponseInternal12effg6_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse$)2DILbd+-/1&4BMRan ,15IhWOGIF89apk΀!,pH*\ȰÇ#JHŋ3jȱǏ CI!(/s`O?}r%OF |fSMJْѢU QI f-uhXcf=jւ/ue,ToںQ|{wnݳO*cqjW(`՜XqᶕnLtpⳓb. YteԍO.T)9isjkl-s.Iȓ+_μУKn1 ;_Yhttp://infotrac.galegroup.com.proxy2.library.uiuc.edu/it/images/english/cus_retrieval.gif/01OAbplist00 Y$archiverX$versionT$topX$objects_NSKeyedArchiver _WebResourceResponse )/078?GOZNS.objectsWNS.keys@ABCDEFHIJKLMN VServer]Last-Modified]Accept-RangesZConnectionTDate^Content-Length\Content-Type_Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1_Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:09:45 GMTTnoneUclose_Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:25:41 GMTS95012^__`6_NSMutableDictionary\NSDictionary12bcc6_NSHTTPURLResponseInternal12effg6_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse$)2DILbd+-/1  !/=HM\i &+/ChQOGIF89apk΀!,pH*\ȰÇ#JHŋ3jȱǏ CIr!O"TYeD ai%A8my&͙2DSΣ?XԨQ= t(ԨR[R%@YGnu'٠a?Z+ӣhʝKݻx˷߿a;_Thttp://infotrac.galegroup.com.proxy2.library.uiuc.edu/it/images/english/cus_link.gif456OFbplist00 Y$archiverX$versionT$topX$objects_NSKeyedArchiver _WebResourceResponse )/078?GOZNS.objectsWNS.keys@ABCDEFHIJKLMN VServer]Last-Modified]Accept-RangesZConnectionTDate^Content-Length\Content-Type_Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1_Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:09:45 GMTTnoneUclose_Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:06:05 GMTS29912^__`6_NSMutableDictionary\NSDictionary12bcc6_NSHTTPURLResponseInternal12effg6_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse$)2DILbd+-/1&4BMRan +04HhVO+GIF89apk΀!,p` dihlp,tmx|` Eb2'ʒΩ#I\FDњn?uk'Ӽ~ΟW}v'{g~yxHpna~n>pl]jh:Rcro9{x^8!;_Yhttp://infotrac.galegroup.com.proxy2.library.uiuc.edu/it/images/english/cus_checklist.gif !"9:;ODbplist00 Y$archiverX$versionT$topX$objects_NSKeyedArchiver _WebResourceResponse )/078?GOZNS.objectsWNS.keys@ABCDEFHIJKLMN VServer]Last-Modified]Accept-RangesZConnectionTDate^Content-Length\Content-Type_Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1_Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:09:45 GMTTnoneUclose_Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:05:53 GMTS26212^__`6_NSMutableDictionary\NSDictionary12bcc6_NSHTTPURLResponseInternal12effg6_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse$)2DILbd+-/1 $2@KP_l  ).2FhTOGIF89apk΀!,p` dihlp,tmx|`@,`DR5[OStNUWʵnfZ>c4lyyZ*9wbo~Ysvmq~:jOjx}dnY-!;_Whttp://infotrac.galegroup.com.proxy2.library.uiuc.edu/it/images/english/cus_back_to.gif>?@OJbplist00 Y$archiverX$versionT$topX$objects_NSKeyedArchiver _WebResourceResponse )/078?GOZNS.objectsWNS.keys@ABCDEFHIJKLMN VServer]Last-Modified]Accept-RangesZConnectionTDate^Content-Length\Content-Type_Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1_Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:09:45 GMTTnoneUclose_Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:25:41 GMTS27112^__`6_NSMutableDictionary\NSDictionary12bcc6_NSHTTPURLResponseInternal12effg6_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse$)2DILbd+-/1  !#*8FQVer /48LhZOGIF89apk΀!,p` dihlp,tmx|@,1pR%IʬS( kQ1P#gZ &glu%׽ePvgfp|.~uwwq/Ryhvcx{!;_]http://infotrac.galegroup.com.proxy2.library.uiuc.edu/it/images/english/cus_ret_citations.gifCDEOFbplist00 Y$archiverX$versionT$topX$objects_NSKeyedArchiver _WebResourceResponse )/078?GOZNS.objectsWNS.keys@ABCDEFHIJKLMN VServer]Last-Modified]Accept-RangesZConnectionTDate^Content-Length\Content-Type_Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1_Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:09:45 GMTTnoneUclose_Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:05:53 GMTS25312^__`6_NSMutableDictionary\NSDictionary12bcc6_NSHTTPURLResponseInternal12effg6_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse$)2DILbd *,.0&4BMRan +04HhVOGIF89apk΀!,pz` dihlp,tmx|pH\Hޱ\9(S(U x&헫F4i u]3Kq^|`yUx|;R~y8u^xIc*!;_Zhttp://infotrac.galegroup.com.proxy2.library.uiuc.edu/it/images/english/cus_ret_search.gifHIJOGbplist00 Y$archiverX$versionT$topX$objects_NSKeyedArchiver _WebResourceResponse )/078?GOZNS.objectsWNS.keys@ABCDEFHIJKLMN VServer]Last-Modified]Accept-RangesZConnectionTDate^Content-Length\Content-Type_Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1_Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:09:45 GMTTnoneUclose_Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:05:53 GMTT108712^__`6_NSMutableDictionary\NSDictionary12bcc6_NSHTTPURLResponseInternal12effg6_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse$)2DILbd+-/1&4BMRan ,15IhWO?GIF89apk΀!,pH*\ȰÇ#JHŋ3jȱǏ C@@B KJa*)5Hd8}$J7])QLJuѨIVejQ=NJk֙\UYS&٦e"=;UعnŚ%+ݟj5oa՚gXCB5uh1khyϠCMF !5iLՊY_4;6N/e4W~xʹku,Yð1Ӯ֮lF]]^3ꍬ};_Yhttp://infotrac.galegroup.com.proxy2.library.uiuc.edu/it/images/english/cus_databases.gifMNOOHbplist00 Y$archiverX$versionT$topX$objects_NSKeyedArchiver _WebResourceResponse )/078?GOZNS.objectsWNS.keys@ABCDEFHIJKLMN VServer]Last-Modified]Accept-RangesZConnectionTDate^Content-Length\Content-Type_Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1_Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:09:45 GMTTnoneUclose_Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:05:53 GMTS25912^__`6_NSMutableDictionary\NSDictionary12bcc6_NSHTTPURLResponseInternal12effg6_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse$)2DILbd+-/1 !(6DOTcp -26JhXOGIF89apk΀!,p` dihlp,tmx| 0EGD5PXZi@ȭv\q[Ѹ<,63L?2?GOZNS.objectsWNS.keys@ABCDEFHIJKLMN VServer]Last-Modified]Accept-RangesZConnectionTDate^Content-Length\Content-Type_Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1_Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:09:45 GMTTnoneUclose_Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:05:53 GMTT147212^__`6_NSMutableDictionary\NSDictionary12bcc6_NSHTTPURLResponseInternal12effg6_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse$)2DILbd+-/1  !#*8FQVer 059Mh[OGIF89a###[.k,c3k>:vB}LbpˁاEs%N+Z/_8p6l;s5iFz,E*U=_5S3f2b'Lw#EkDv@kФ 0W{Y<[y?NZPejpp|oh[6$)ܱ@bcw@6CX$T*wH $XI0w*w\wH rHdwdwH>@wwPwP>d>P>8<H>`PR{ww{w(iid>Hw|wX>P>hwwPwhXX| PU~1P>0d \|hW| EP> $@ ѻ@XI cus_8w@wH}W|rHICIXIIrHCI!<,##@yH@= *\ (@o @# $8HX0.TXB9bƔ1@eJ!$D0A`8p@ԃHE@tFMP 0j ƏU5(p8" @ )ݐAgԭK#c/ t\鶄=,,\蘜o:p;N@A<=/졡j٦$@j0P7}o``w tX1C3hh5@|y2rQqvJPE&:ĤC SN A;0QHA0B RBd, ԃ ,p"D q!<~B eH0Qh #["QBCV 1Pa .pB "W gq0 (ׂ;_]http://infotrac.galegroup.com.proxy2.library.uiuc.edu/it/images/english/cus_purl_markable.gifUVWOFbplist00 Y$archiverX$versionT$topX$objects_NSKeyedArchiver _WebResourceResponse )/078?GOZNS.objectsWNS.keys@ABCDEFHIJKLMN VServer]Last-Modified]Accept-RangesZConnectionTDate^Content-Length\Content-Type_Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1_Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:09:45 GMTTnoneUclose_Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:05:53 GMTT209412^__`6_NSMutableDictionary\NSDictionary12bcc6_NSHTTPURLResponseInternal12effg6_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse$)2DILbd+-/1%3ALQ`m +04HhVO.GIF89adŧlfpgJIC2ùZ-(&㼓XTR[޽vsqzӼӺ̙ sffftәMIG̲v;74|`\Z֍ҰÆnǹʖc[B̚~|­% |sR`IDBŊspn`ơʽܭ@;9RPM2.+fӧɼ|ytͱεyfffĝɌx֖{ġ`*&#{ofJ|iD@=ڶɭyӽ̯믢rPKD֟qmlprֻ#333[XUUQOحͳbεŽ;;;͏0+(ÿ^zzzb_]xussϯ̒Ѻ}PLI(# BBB٥t~lfƦߴ޼rХֽ!,d@e Hp"B*\ȰÇ20+>P@ BÅA&8 C"ʜIsBra"G@>h` Yn0`jE6K]SB8#CI86eYYI,HJa&No*^,`WyAC"p lm!z4JW8Fr|B#.@B&Qc QL\Ԍ!᦬?1kj߮0+TX " J4 aN=PmNο&**A7! XaDArUA^`l(P p"A'tA'F K$'%Ix@D)I#8y4`v!hTҔGQ,V%PSdITP!T7@| tZaHтZgIUP@ OB Au4B 'mrxWp K $qwf (t` .BR S;qTF@Pqr'Dʲw%\,"Ha]pm)hPJ)xP P){(e^' pz(K =`,Y@EDž!P' t@p #ZubdP]'ű0,,L1IB.A-x0 $n!E!ԑ" ]ݧz|Uȡh^rp @cr͝-[jt#X!'`ަT@عM' FM `C%,XXr(q,|nxr@CXaE9ls) ( 4md-q.S1a7pB>!^0 _ǭD Da oȂME_4vg 0@!3Z- (2 A8`HX@dA ( B0w.n{Xp2!DJ{< IN摅І?GOZNS.objectsWNS.keys@ABCDEFHIJKLMN VServer]Last-Modified]Accept-RangesZConnectionTDate^Content-Length\Content-Type_Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1_Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:09:45 GMTTnoneUclose_Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:25:41 GMTS27712^__`6_NSMutableDictionary\NSDictionary12bcc6_NSHTTPURLResponseInternal12effg6_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse$)2DILbd+-/1 #1?JO^k  (-1EhSOGIF89a-bfк,#h dAr6( :I.E8rFÕ@ HQIj1 :LG/#DA@E wd }uwo#UtwR$ jm"-~# Qg$<hp- ,N>$[8.'d1 JN:') K$!;_Vhttp://infotrac.galegroup.com.proxy2.library.uiuc.edu/it/images/english/cus_prevpg.gif]^_OCbplist00 Y$archiverX$versionT$topX$objects_NSKeyedArchiver _WebResourceResponse )/078?GOZNS.objectsWNS.keys@ABCDEFHIJKLMN VServer]Last-Modified]Accept-RangesZConnectionTDate^Content-Length\Content-Type_Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1_Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:09:45 GMTTnoneUclose_Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:25:41 GMTS27912^__`6_NSMutableDictionary\NSDictionary12bcc6_NSHTTPURLResponseInternal12effg6_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse$)2DILbd+-/1 #1?JO^k  (-1EhSOGIF89a-bfк,#CSE3츘Mi"ZG:patJQ92b! :d_BhD˛.E`E p}p_ [pwuyeg #X"[{_"+"pkWG$#,[ PE&d9GK N79,5(),!;_Vhttp://infotrac.galegroup.com.proxy2.library.uiuc.edu/it/images/english/cus_nextpg.gifabcOAbplist00 Y$archiverX$versionT$topX$objects_NSKeyedArchiver _WebResourceResponse )/078?GOZNS.objectsWNS.keys@ABCDEFHIJKLMN VServer]Last-Modified]Accept-RangesZConnectionTDate^Content-Length\Content-Type_Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1_Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:09:45 GMTTnoneUclose_Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:25:41 GMTS37812^__`6_NSMutableDictionary\NSDictionary12bcc6_NSHTTPURLResponseInternal12effg6_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse$)2DILbd+-/1  !/=HM\i &+/ChQOzGIF89ac //)>>5MMB\\Okk\{{ivfƩն!,c$d)Ehlpt=FP|ЧKr`?GOZNS.objectsWNS.keys@ABCDEFHIJKLMN VServer]Last-Modified]Accept-RangesZConnectionTDate^Content-Length\Content-Type_Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1_Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:09:45 GMTTnoneUclose_Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:25:41 GMTS43912^__`6_NSMutableDictionary\NSDictionary12bcc6_NSHTTPURLResponseInternal12effg6_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse$)2DILbd+-/1%3ALQ`m */3GhUOGIF89ac //)>>5MMB\\Okk\{{ivfƩն!,c$d)Ehlpt=FP|ЧKr{0aHM. 1npJ5Za7|< A8@! <|\pmKdt4vB \    p LH][; pmP ƹ5C :Љ`9ۖQi9;hE/qaމ( Xj2 -v$hp@N47q &3N4Rϟ9vn h"(XʴӧPJJ5j;_Xhttp://infotrac.galegroup.com.proxy2.library.uiuc.edu/it/images/english/cus_see_also.gifabcefgabcefgabcnopOGbplist00 Y$archiverX$versionT$topX$objects_NSKeyedArchiver _WebResourceResponse )/078?GOZNS.objectsWNS.keys@ABCDEFHIJKLMN VServer]Last-Modified]Accept-RangesZConnectionTDate^Content-Length\Content-Type_Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1_Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:09:45 GMTTnoneUclose_Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:25:41 GMTS20412^__`6_NSMutableDictionary\NSDictionary12bcc6_NSHTTPURLResponseInternal12effg6_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse$)2DILbd *,.0 '5CNSbo ,15IhWOGIF89a̙fff33fff!,ypI8qxH!JB$bW[7R䊳0@RN԰H.C(ZhG6cLrcwyoq  ! X{ fwf;_[http://infotrac.galegroup.com.proxy2.library.uiuc.edu/it/images/english/cus_holdings_av.gifYZ[]^_tuvOFbplist00 Y$archiverX$versionT$topX$objects_NSKeyedArchiver _WebResourceResponse )/078?GOZNS.objectsWNS.keys@ABCDEFHIJKLMN VServer]Last-Modified]Accept-RangesZConnectionTDate^Content-Length\Content-Type_Netscape-Enterprise/3.6 SP1_Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:09:45 GMTTnoneUclose_Thu, 06 Jul 2006 05:05:53 GMTT156512^__`6_NSMutableDictionary\NSDictionary12bcc6_NSHTTPURLResponseInternal12effg6_NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse$)2DILbd+-/1%3ALQ`m +04HhVOGIF89aq(̙̙̙ffff3f3ff3333f3f)wؤADw8wؤCHfؤF HLF @H`l"/ؤ`s@HOpen@B([C:\WINNT\Profiles\rheller\Desktopthomson_gale.gif <cw0@Bu wL AwF   Y([,8(x  d[xw$ ؤPx,w`w<TGw C:\WINNT\Profiles\rheller\Desktop\thomson_gale.gif Gw;EF LCEF ([6'Readyw[Ep/[ (wffF wPDwwCF !,q(@`P@ 02 4Pb 8Î8sɳϟ@ H (]O HJA*Hu`rUTBu ңp +C˷_U`<`T`1b`,I3d8@@$XĎavL 4r~ѱHE(@5U j^ޓ1H 24kuRʌn_ϾrΞp>;ܺm bT ('Pyj)W~VZg 0tH.F} (n t[o#͖ aq#{8樣t 0]g+zs) [KvZO:dQXP$nC@p]bٓ`)g wl 0xQĕX[eD@V9Ĩƕrd} kZzIc@&gato` Zyԁ`|*g'P~"4wjX.@^GぜZq{Frea`^Qp$\$mԐH]y*\\~6`pGHu^!tIVlgI(IXU@bo If/x 4I)3p/l&`Kr,5落p(P! @>@T\4Ng`M[#W4B23DkRYtm7{;_Xhttp://infotrac.galegroup.com.proxy2.library.uiuc.edu/it/images/english/thomson_gale.gifxyz{|_WebResourceTextEncodingNameUUTF-8OArticle 6
InfoTrac Web logo
 
Help on article
Title List. You can see all the titles contained in this database.
Reformat article and print in one click
Local jump to Print, E-mail and Retrieval section
Local jump to subject headings section
View mark list
Back to citations
Back to search page
Choose another collection from menu
Go back to library home page
InfoMark: you can save this URL for future useUniversity Library,University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
Expanded Academic ASAP  Plus 		ingenta


previous article   ——      Article 6 of 15      ——   next article


    Mark 
Policy Studies Journal, Winter 1993 v21 n4 p724(11)
Overview of the disability movement: history, legislative record, and political implications. (Disability Issues in Public Policy) David Pfeiffer.

Abstract: A brief history and legislative record of the disability movement, together with their political ramifications, are presented. The history of disability policy, taking off from the efforts of Samuel Gridley Howe in the mid-19th century, is examined. An assessment of the effects of eugenics is also presented, along with the notable achievements of the disability movement in the 1970s and 1980s, capped off by the Americans with Disabilities Act. The basic model of disability policy and the political and policy implications that confront the movement are also discussed.

Full Text: COPYRIGHT Policy Studies Organization 1993

This article presents a brief history and legislative record of the disability movement, along with their political implications. Beginning with the mid-nineteenth century efforts of Samuel Gridley Howe, the history of disability policy is reviewed. The impact of the field of eugenics is assessed. Notable achievements of the disability movement over the last two decades are presented, culminating in the Americans with Disabilities Act. The basic paradigm of disability policy is presented. The political and policy implications facing the disability movement are discussed.

Many persons outside the disability community were surprised during the 1970s and 1980s to learn that there were militant persons with disabilities who were demanding their rights as citizens. They assumed that disabled people were either incapable of organized, concerted political action or else were content with their lot of government handouts and welfare. If individuals with disabilities had problems, then, they assumed, the professionals (doctors and social workers) would take care of them. Society had professionals whose job it was to take care of the disadvantaged members of society.

In the 1990s it is painfully clear that professionals are not able to take care of disadvantaged members of society. Nevertheless, there are still many people who assume that persons with disabilities need professional guidance (actually, control) in order to live a fruitful life (Watson, 1993c). However, when one set of persons (often the professionals) controls the lives of other persons, devaluation and dehumanization results. This dehumanization is nowhere more evident than in the history of social policy regarding persons labelled as disabled. In the nineteenth century it mattered not whether they had (in current terms) a physical or a mental disability, because they were viewed as "the feebleminded." This point is an appropriate place to begin to trace the rise of the disability movement.

The Nineteenth Century: Samuel Howe

The earliest social policy in this country for persons labelled as being disabled appeared in the middle of the nineteenth century. It was the result of the complex phenomenon called the industrial revolution, which encouraged a higher educational level in society. Anyone who was not able to attain the minimum educational level (about today's third-grade education) was stigmatized with the label feebleminded. Persons who had a mental impairment were not the only ones so labelled. Included was anyone with a communication problem (vision, hearing, or speech impairment) that impeded learning, or a mobility problem that prevented the adequate socialization necessary to learn or made them unable to attend school. These persons were the object of mid-nineteenth century social policy.

The same tendency exists today. As Wright (1983, chap. 3) elaborates, the concept of "spread" details this process. People are likely to take a single characteristic of person, such as a physical disabiity, and infer another trait such as an inability to learn or to make intelligent decisions. In the twentieth century having a disability is too often equated with being feebleminded.

The earliest efforts to aid persons with disabilities were carried out by Dr. Samuel Gridley Howe, of Boston, Massachusetts. In 1846 the Massachusetts legislature made Howe the head of a commission that was to study the problem of the feebleminded and to recommend a policy for their relief. As a result of Howe's work, the Massachusetts legislature appropriated funds to create the Massachusetts School for Idiotic Children and Youth, which Howe established in Boston in 1849.

It was Howe's intention that the schools function in the fashion of a family (Bledsoe, 1993). The "disabled" child or youth would eventually return to his or her family. While at the school, the child would "... gain some really useful knowledge; ... most of them will become cleanly decent, temperate and industrious; and ... all of them will be better and happier ..." (quoted in President's Committee on Mental Retardation, 1977, p. 4).

Howe was so successful that he received more funds from the Massachusetts legislature. But he was having trouble sending the school residents back to their families and home communities, in part because parents did not want to resume their care and in part because it was assumed that they were better off in the school. Although Howe opposed permanent institutionalization in the schools, he was too successful in his work. In 1874, when he retired as head of the school, Howe warned of the dangers of segregating the feebleminded and the disabled. He said that even they had rights that would be violated by a policy of institutionalization and segregation, but his voice was the last one to oppose institutionalization for some fifty years.

In spite of Howe's opposition and warning, the foundation was laid in the last quarter of the nineteenth century for the dehumanizing institutionalization of disabled persons with the purpose of custodial care, not education. Since disabled persons were associated with social ills they were forced to enter the schools, where they were compelled to work not in order to learn a trade but in order to pay the cost of the institution in which they were confined.

The Twentieth Century: Havelock Ellis

This policy toward persons with disabilities runs strongly throughout intellectual thought in the United States during the twentieth century. For example, Havelock Ellis was a leader in the struggle for human rights, yet ironically in the very book (Ellis, 1927) that is cited for its strong stand on women's rights there can be found passages on "The Problem of Feeblemindedness." Ellis wrote that the feebleminded have no self-restraint: "They are not adequately capable of resisting their own impulses or the solicitations of others, and they are unable to understand adequately the motives which guide the conduct of ordinary people" (Ellis, 1927, p. 35). They were viewed as a present burden on society and a menace to the future: "In large measure they form the reservoir from which the predatory classes are recruited" (Ellis, 1927, p. 38). Again, Ellis wrote:

Feeble-mindedness is an absolute dead-weight on the race. It is an evil that is unmitigated. The heavy and complicated social burdens and injuries it inflicts on the present generation are without compensation, while the unquestionable fact that in any degree it is highly inheritable renders it a deteriorating poison to the race; it depreciates the quality of a people. Their very existence is itself an impediment (Ellis, 1927, p. 43).

Although Ellis advocated only involuntary sterilization for disabled persons, others went further. Extermination was hinted at by some writers, but was not yet advocated openly. Instead, segregation of most persons with disabilities into institutions and sterilization of disabled women was the policy answer. One writer said: "No feebleminded person should be allowed to marry or become a parent.... Certain families should become extinct" (Fernald, 1912, p. 98). This policy became the law of the land in Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927), the U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld such a policy as put forth in a Virginia statute.

The policy of sterilization of disabled persons was strongly supported by persons who were part of the eugenics movement. In 1922 one of these persons, Harry Laughlin, drew up a model sterilization law. It required the sterilization of the following "defective" classes:

(1) feebleminded; (2) insane (including the psychopathic); (3) criminalistic (including the delinquent and wayward); (4) epileptic; (5) inebriate (including drug habitues); (6) diseased (including the tuberculous, the syphilitic, the leprous, and others with chronic, infectious, and legally segregable diseases); (7) blind (including those with seriously impaired vision); (8) deaf (including those with seriously impaired hearing); (9) deformed (including the crippled); and (10) dependent (including orphans, ne'er-do-wells, the homeless, tramps, and paupers) (quoted in Berns, 1953, p. 766).

As today with other model laws, this one served as an example in numerous state legislatures. In 1938, 33 states had a sterilization law (Smith, 1985, p. 139). During the period of 1921--1964, in the United States, over 63,000 persons were sterilized involuntarily for a so-called "genetically related reason" (Ferster, 1966). The Virginia law that was upheld in Buck v. Bell was repealed in 1968, but sterilizations under it continued until 1972 (Burgdorf & Burgdorf, 1977). By the 1960s sterilization was used in fewer and fewer cases, but 26 states still had a sterilization law for persons labelled mentally retarded and in 23 states it was compulsory (Scheerenberger, 1987, p. 189). In 1974 the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW) had to be enjoined from providing federal funds for compulsory sterilization (Scheerenberger, 1987, p. 191). Such cases today still appear in state courts.

These attitudes toward disabled people continue. For example, in June 1989 a minister in Washington, DC, who has epilepsy, had a seizure on his way home from work. He was taken to the hospital in an ambulance and when he awoke he got out of bed. Three hospital security guards forced him back into bed and strapped him down. When he protested and demanded to see a physician, he was gagged with a surgical mask. The medical staff at the hospital informed him that since persons with epilepsy were dangerous, he was being forcibly restrained (National Disability Action Center, 1989). Such ignorance of epilepsy and other disabilities leads not only to individual violations of civil rights, but also to discriminatory statutes.

Reaction: The Disability Movement

Opposition to this treatment arose from disabled persons and others (Shapiro, 1993). This opposition was the first wave of the disability movement, and resulted in the creation of groups to address disability issues. Veterans who were blinded during World War I and other adults with vision impairments refused to assume a dependent role making brooms and cane chairs for the rest of their lives. They banded together and founded the American Foundation for the Blind (AFB), which was instrumental in educating the public about blindness and laid the foundation for later achievements. Parents who protested the exclusion from public school of their children who were labelled mentally retarded formed groups in Ohio, Washington, and New York (Fine, 1989). Out of these parent groups, and in combination with some professional groups, the National Association for Retarded Citizens (or the Arc, as it is now called) was formed in 1950. Groups advocating the rights of people with cerebral palsy appeared and eventually created a national organization that today has one of the strongest representations in Washington, DC, the Governmental Activities Office of the United Cerebral Palsy Associations.

After World War II several new groups appeared. The National Federation of the Blind (NFB) was formed because the AFB was not controlled by persons with vision impairments. World War II-disabled veterans with the help of the (then-named) Veterans Administration organized the Paralyzed Veterans of America. The PVA, as it is better known, was at the forefront of political action for the civil rights of persons with disabilities. Even though there were many groups working on behalf of the rights of disabled persons during the 1950s and 1960s, they focused on the delivery of needed services, and the leadership consisted mainly of nondisabled parents. It is understandable that parents would seek services and service delivery systems that would take over their parental responsibilities. Even persons who became disabled as adults were usually not provided the opportunity to assume leadership roles, with the exception of the AFB and the PVA. Some parents of disabled children tended to continue to view them as childlike even when they were adults. These same parent/leaders could not bring themselves to see other disabled adults as capable of leadership.

Most of the (now) older disabled leaders in the disability movement saw such groups as necessary, but not inviting. Instead, having asserted a right to live independently, they became involved in the great social change effort of the day, the civil rights movement. In addition, some of them gained experience in the Vietnam antiwar movement, the women's rights movement, and often in Democratic party politics. They learned the skills and concepts necessary to organize and to run groups. They felt empowered in a way that participation in the older, parent-led groups could never allow. These now-empowered persons with disabilities were the new wave of the disability movement. With their experience and training in social change groups, they focused on rights as well as services. Social change was their objective, and they undertook to achieve it.

In 1972 the Boston Center for Independent Living and the Center for Independent Living in Berkeley were both established. Although spurred on by the need for services, they represented a new type of disability organization that is equally concerned with the civil rights of persons with disabilities. They made the point that without necessary services, many persons with disabilities would be denied their role as citizens. This drive for services also resulted in passage of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, containing Sections 503 and 504 which broadened the concept of who could benefit from rehabilitation. Section 503 requires holders of federal contracts over a certain dollar amount to implement affirmative action programs to hire disabled persons. Section 504 prohibited discrimination on the basis of a disabling condition in any federally funded program.

The newly-created American Coalition of Citizens with Disabilities (ACCD) became the national center for organizing the disability community on behalf of presidential candidate Jimmy Carter. After Carter's victory, the ACCD led lobbying of the U.S. Congress on behalf of persons with disabilities. As often happens to advocacy organizations with considerable energy but few resources, the ACCD failed to survive into the 1990s. The ACCD organized nationwide demonstrations on April 4, 1977, in order to pressure the new Carter administration to sign the Section 504 regulations. Sit-ins resulted in several regional offices of HEW, the lead agency for writing the regulations. The persons occupying HEW offices in San Francisco and Washington refused to leave until the regulations were signed. They were supported in both cities by coalitions of community groups, including civil rights organizations (Shapiro, 1993). Finally, on April 28, the new HEW Secretary, Joseph Califano, signed the regulations, knowing that within a month some 3,000 disabled persons and their supporters would arrive in Washington for the White House Conference on Handicapped Individuals.

The White House Conference on Handicapped Individuals was itself a watershed in the history of the disability movement. During the opening ceremonies of the conference, Brock Adams, Secretary of the Department of Transportation (DOT), announced that all buses purchased with federal DOT funds had to be accessible. Patricia Harris, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), announced the establishment of the Office of Independent Living for the Disabled to ensure that housing built with federal funds was accessible. While these policy victories and others were important, perhaps more significant was the fact that disabled persons from across the country came to know their counterparts in other states. These contacts remain today.

During the Reagan administration in the 1980s, then- Vice President George Bush headed a concerted effort to rewrite many sets of federal regulations. The Section 504 regulations became one of his targets. The disability community successfully organized to defeat their weakening by lobbying Congress and through focusing media attention on the effort. However, as Burkhauser, Haveman, and Wolfe (1993) show, people with disabilities lost income in real dollars during the Reagan administration.

During the 1988 presidential election the disability movement received a considerable boost in polls conducted by Louis Harris and Associates (Louis Harris & Associates, Inc., 1988). Their work showed that, before the Democratic convention, presidential candidate Michael Dukakis had a three percentage point lead over George Bush. Almost all of this lead, however, was provided by voters who identified themselves as being disabled. After the Democratic convention Dukakis' lead grew to 12 percentage points. Over the next three months Dukakis' support dropped until Bush led by five percentage points in September and went on to win the general election by seven percentage points. From one to three percentage points of Bush's winning seven-point margin came from voters who are disabled, and who changed from Dukakis to Bush after the Republican candidate pledged to include persons with disabilities in the mainstream of society (Genevie, L., letter to Edward M. Rogers, Jr., 1988). Disabled voters were an important factor in Bush's victory.

After years of hard work the disability movement arrived on the national political, policymaking stage. The leaders of the disability movement learned and the movement matured. There are a number of disability-related pressure groups today that are making their policy objectives known to local, state, and national leaders and policymakers. In spite of the obstacles and barriers that had to be overcome, these groups and individuals achieved notable policy goals in the past and are presenting new demands today.

Disability Policy

the product of the disability movement today consists of a set of public policies referred to as disability policy (DeJong, 1991). In order to understand this policy and how it differs from other types of policy, five points will be reviewed: (a) The dominant definition of disability used in studying disability policy; (b) the number of persons who fit this definition; (c) the basic paradigm used in the study of disability policy; (d) some of the more important disability policies today, such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA); and (e) the funding involved.

Definition

Although there are over fifty differing definitions of disability in federal statutes and regulations alone, the predominant one is found in the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 in connection with Section 504 and is repeated in the ADA. In the words of the latter (126 USC 12102):

The term "disability" means, with respect to an individual (a) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of such individual; (b) a record of such an impairment; or (c) being regarded as having such an impairment.

Major life activities are defined to include such things as mobility, self-care, education, communication, socialization, self-direction, and employment.

Numbers

In stating its findings as the basis for the ADA, Congress used the figure of 43 million disabled persons in the United States today, or 17% of the population. Other estimates are given for the number of disabled persons in the United States, ranging from 20 million (9%) to 50 million (20%) (National Council on the Handicapped, 1986). One of the earliest policy-oriented studies to use a larger estimate was Pfeiffer and Giampietro (1977), with a figure of 41.4 million, or 20% of the population at that time.

Many of the lower figures are actually subsets of the disabled population of concern to a particular agency or profession (Allan, 1980; Burkhauser & Haveman, 1982; Fitzgerald, 1984; Johnson, 1981; Krute & Burdette, 1981). Two of the most common subsets are physically disabled persons and mentally impaired persons. Another common subset is used by employment and vocational rehabilitation agencies, which usually focus on 18- to 65-year-old disabled persons. Education agencies look at disabled persons less than a particular age, usually 22. None of these last two subsets include institutionalized disabled persons, nor disabled persons over 65 years of age.

In addition to subsets, many researchers, such as DeJong and Lifchez (1983), use federal Census data on disabled persons. The Census contains a question about functional limitations that is used to screen out "nondisabled" people for subsequent disability-related questions. Many disabilities cause limitations, but many disabled persons either will not or cannot admit to any problem because of the social stigma attached to a disability (Goffman, 1963; Zola, 1982). Those persons who do admit to a disability are then asked if it limits their working or their use of public transportation. Many disabled persons have no work limitation and no trouble using public transportation, so they are not counted in the disabled population.

It can be argued that all these figures are too low. Moore (1983) gives evidence that the number of disabled elderly persons is underestimated. Fagan and Wallace (1979), Newacheck, Budetti, and McManus (1984), and Ysseldyke, Algozzine, and Richey (1982) discuss the question of how many disabled children there are and why the figures are rising. Kisker (1964) and Greenblatt (1970) taken together give evidence that the number of mentally ill persons may reach 10% of the population or more. Brown and Stoudt (1978) indicate that at least 1.5% of the United States population are institutionalized and disabled. All together these numbers could push the percentage of persons with disabilities higher.

Paradigm

The fundamental paradigm used in the study of disability policy by scholars is different from fields such as rehabilitation, medical sociology, psychology of deviance, special education, and the allied health sciences (Hahn, 1983, 1985; Kiger & Hey, 1985; Pfeiffer & Novak-Krajewski, 1983). These other fields use a medical model to study disability. In the medical model the disabled person is a patient for whom decisions must be made. The problem is defined in terms of an impairment, lack of a vocational skill, poor adjustment, or lack of motivation on the part of the disabled person. The solution is intervention by the professional, who decides what is the desired outcome for the disabled person.

The paradigm of disability studies that is used to analyze disability policy is different (DeJong, 1983). It considers the disabled person as the primary actor and the focus of the research. The problem is seen as one that exists in the environment, such as the attitudinal, architectural, sensory, and economic barriers faced by persons with disabilities. Often the problem is further defined as overdependence on professionals and others, as well as inadequate support services to overcome these barriers. The solution is seen to be (generally) self-advocacy, system advocacy, removal of barriers, and control by the disabled person, who decides what is his/her desired outcome.

Disability policy is not health policy, not employment policy, not special education policy, not housing policy, nor transportation policy, but it covers these concerns (and others), yet not in the way in which specialists in those fields usually do. There seems to be agreement that the study of disability policy is characterized by a focus upon a policy (or the lack of one), its implementation (if there is a policy), and a concern for relevance. If the role of the policy analyst is to produce the data and the arguments that are used in the debate over policy (Majone, 1989), then specialists in disability policy generally use the policy analysis approach. Following the language of Hirsch (1990) the analysis of disability policy can be viewed as a blend of sociology, economics, and political science, with strong influences from anthropology, history, and psychology. It assumes that people are utility maximizers, but that their utility functions are quite complex and are influenced by group and social value structures. The values followed by people are both instrumental and expressive.

Policies

Some of the more important disability policies that were achieved by the disability movement on the national level are the following. The Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, as amended, (49 USC 1612) requires that systems accepting federal monies authorized under the Act must make those systems accessible to elderly and handicapped persons. The Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 (42 USC 4151) requires that all buildings built with federal funds be accessible.

Until the ADA was passed, the most far-reaching statute for disabled persons was Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 USC 794), which protects persons with disabilities from discrimination in federally-funded programs. The Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (20 USC 1401), often called PL 94--142, requires the education of children with disabilities in the least restrictive environment. When it was reauthorized with amendments in 1990 its name was changed to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act of 1975 (42 USC 6001) had an impact by creating state developmental disabilities councils for planning and advocacy. In Massachusetts, for example, the council channeled some $2 million into the new statewide cross-disability coalition during the 1980s. The Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act (PL 98--435), which was effective for elections starting in 1986, requires that all polling places in federal elections be accessible for elderly and disabled citizens. The Air Carrier Access Act of 1986 (PL 99--435) prohibits discrimination "against any otherwise qualified handicapped individual, by reason of such handicap, in the provision of air transportation." The Fair Housing Amendments of 1988 brought protections to disabled people in the field of housing.

The ADA (PL 101--336) is the most conspicuous disability policy document today (Bishop & Jones, 1993; Friedman, 1993; Gostin & Beyer, 1993; Percy, 1993; Tucker, 1992; Wehman, 1993; Zuckerman, 1993). When completely implemented, it will protect persons with disabilities from discrimination on the basis of disability in the areas of employment, transportation, access to public facilities, and communication. In addition to federal policy, every state has a number of statutes relating to the daily life of persons with disabilities. In addition, six states have some version of protection against discrimination based upon a disability in their constitutions.

Funding

Considerable amounts of public funds are involved in carrying out disability policy. Berkowitz and Hill (1986) and Berkowitz (1987) gave a figure of $122 billion annually at the beginning of the 1980s. That figure included only medical payments (Medicare) and income replacement programs (SSI and SSDI). When education, rehabilitation, disabled veterans' services, health-related services, and other social services (both public and private) are included, the figure probably doubles. When the growth of Medicare, Medicaid, and other programs over the 1980s is factored in, the figure may reach $500 billion dollars a year in the 1990s.

The political implications of these facts are that the disability movement is now a force on the national, state, and some local levels. With the passage of the ADA a new wave of disability activists appeared (Bowe, 1990). There are new actors to be considered when public policy is made (Holbrook & Percy, 1992; Lewis & Allee, 1992; Watson, 1993a, 1993b). The disability movement can no longer be ignored by policymakers. On the political level new alliances are possible. Coalition building in Congress and in state legislatures around disability-related issues can happen. Federal and state agencies can use the ADA and related legislation to generate support for their overall objectives and budgets. The passage of the ADA marked the political maturation of the disability movement.

Conclusion

Over the last 150 years people with disabilities suffered under public policies that were supposed to assist them. Ignorance and bigotry consigned disabled people to segregated institutions and substandard conditions. Many social ills were attributed to the existence of persons with disabilities, especially when the eugenics movement played a major role in public policy. The disability movement arose out of the reaction to these abuses and conditions. Gradually persons with disabilities asserted themselves and called for their rightful place in society. The disability movement has the opportunity to sharpen its skills and to become a major force in the making of public policy in this nation. Today it is a force, but its power is small when compared to many other groups active in the policymaking system.

Like all pressure groups, the disability movement faces problems. The ADA may be poorly implemented, and a public backlash against it could appear. The economy will have an unpredictable effect on the ADA and the goals of the disability movement (Bolte, 1993). If there are few jobs, then unemployed disabled persons will not be able to use the ADA to gain employment. Court decisions could weaken the ADA and other important disability-related legislation. Already leaders in the disability movement are raising the question of whether funding for services will be cut drastically in order to reduce the national debt (Bowe, 1993). If Congress believes that persons with disabilities who are receiving income support no longer need the money because they can now find jobs, then major programs will be defunded or receive much less funding. No matter what happens with the disability policies now in effect, and no matter what the disability movement faces in the future, the policy analysis community can no longer ignore them (Oliver, 1992). Disability policy engages the attention of decisionmakers in a way it did not in the past (Litvak, 1992; National Council on Disability, 1993). It is the responsibility of the policy analysis community, especially those analysts who identify with the disability community, to focus on disability policy and its implications.

References

Allan, K. (1980). General characteristics of the disabled: An overview. In D. T. Ferron (Ed.), Disability survey 72: Disabled and nondisabled adults (pp. 9--41). Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Berkowitz, E. D. (1987). Disabled policy: America's programs for the handicapped. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Berkowitz, M., & Hill, M. A. (1986). Disability and the labor market: An overview. In M. Berkowitz & M. A. Hill (Eds.), Disability and the labor market: Economic problems, policies, and programs (pp. 1--28). Ithaca, NY: ILR Press.

Berns, W. (1953). Buck v. Bell: Due process of law? Western Political Quarterly, 6, 762--775.

Bishop, P. C., & Jones, A. J., Jr. (1993). Implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990: Assessing the variables of success. Public Administration Review, 53 (2), 121--128.

Bledsoe, C. W. (1993). Dr. Samuel Gridley Howe and the family tree of residential schools. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 87 (6), 174--176.

Bolte, B. (1993). A matter of hiring: Are disabled people in positions of power pulling up the ramps to keep the rest of us out? Mainstream, 18 (2), 20--23.

Bowe, F. (1990). Into the private sector. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 1 (1), 89--101.

Bowe, F. (1993, January/February). Deficits. The Disability Rag, 12--14.

Brown, R. F., & Stoudt, D. W. (1978). 1976 survey of institutionalized persons. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.

Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927).

Burgdorf, R. L., & Burgdorf, M. P. (1977). The wicked witch is almost dead: Buck v. Bell and the sterilization of handicapped persons. Temple Law Quarterly, 50, 995--1034.

Burkhauser, R. V., & Haveman, R. H. (1982). Disability and work: The economics of American policy. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Burkhauser, R. V., Haveman, R. H., & Wolfe, B. L. (1993). How people with disabilities fare when public policies change. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 12 (2), 251--269.

DeJong, G. (1983). Defining and implementing the independent living concept. In N. Crewes & I.K. Zola (Eds.), Independent living for physically disabled people (pp. 4--27). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

DeJong, G. (1991, October 28). Toward a research and training capacity in disability policy. Paper presented to the Research Conference of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management, Bethesda, MD.

DeJong, G., & Lifchez, R. (1983, June). Physical disability and public policy. Scientific American, 257, 40--49.

Ellis, H. (1927). The task of social hygiene (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Fagan, T., & Wallace, A. (1979). Who are the handicapped? The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 58, 215--220.

Fernald, W. (1912). The burden of feeblemindedness. Journal of Psychoasthenics, 18, 90--98.

Ferster, E. Z. (1966). Eliminating the unfit: Is sterilization the answer? Ohio State Law Journal, 27, 591--633.

Fine, J. B. (1989). Catalysts for change: Parents of the handicapped, 1930--1960. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Loyola University of Chicago.

Fitzgerald, I. M. (1984, March/April). New sources of disability statistics. Programs for the handicapped, 12--16.

Friedman, S. (1993). Accommodation issues in the work place for people with disabilities: A needs assessment in an educational setting. Disability, Handicap & Society, 8 (1), 3--23.

Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Gostin, L. O., & Beyer, H. A. (Eds.). (1993). Implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act: Rights and responsibilities of all Americans. Baltimore: Paul Brookes Publishing.

Greenblatt, M. (1970). The troubled mind in the troubled city. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 11, 8--17.

Hahn, H. (1983, March/April). Paternalism and public policy. Society, 21, 36--46.

Hahn, H. (Ed.). (1985). Entire issue devoted to disability and rehabilitation policy. American Behavioral Scientist, 28, 291--432.

Hirsch, P. M. (1990). Rational choice models for sociology: Pro and con. Rationality and Society, 2 (2), 137--141.

Holbrook, T. M., & Percy, S. L. (1992). Exploring variations in state laws providing protection for persons with disabilities. Western Political Quarterly, 45 (1), 201--220.

Johnson, H. M. (1981). Who is handicapped? Defining the protected class under the employment provisions of Title V of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 29, 49--61.

Kiger, G., & Hey, S. C. (Eds.). (1985). A symposium on social aspects of chronic disease and disability. The Social Science Journal, 22, 1--105.

Kisker, G. W. (1964). The disorganized personality. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Krute, A., & Burdette, M. E. (1981). Prevalence of chronic disease, injury, and work disability. In D. T. Ferron (Ed.), Disability survey 72: Disabled and nondisabled adults (pp. 47--65). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Lewis, G. B., & Allee, C. L. (1992). The impact of disabilities on federal career success. Public Administration Review, 52 (4), 389--397.

Litvak, S. (1992). Financing personal assistance services. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 3 (1), 93--105.

Louis Harris & Associates, Inc. (1988). Voting intentions during the 1988 election: A comparison of disabled and non-disabled voters. New York: Author.

Majone, G. (1989). Evidence, argument, and persuasion in the policy process. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Moore, D. (1983, January 30). America's neglected elderly. The New York Times Magazine, pp. 30ff.

National Council on Disability. (1993). Sharing the risk and ensuring independence: A disability perspective on access to health insurance and health-related services. Washington, DC: Author.

National Council on the Handicapped. (1986). Toward independence. Washington, DC: Author.

National Disability Action Center. (1989). Bias suit filed against D.C. hospital by person with epilepsy. Washington, DC: Author.

Newacheck, P. W., Budetti, P. P., & McManus, P. (1984). Trends in childhood disability. American Journal of Public Health, 74, 232--236.

Oliver, M. (1992). Changing the social relations of research production? Disability, Handicap & Society, 7 (2), 101--114.

Percy, S. L. (1993, Winter). The ADA: Expanding mandates for disability rights. Intergovernmental Perspective, 9, 11--14.

Pfeiffer, D., & Giampietro, M. (1977). Government policy toward handicapped individuals. Policy Studies Journal, 6, 93--101.

Pfeiffer, D., & Novak-Krajewski, A. (1983). The emergence of disability studies. The AHSSPPE Bulletin, 1, 116--122.

President's Committee on Mental Retardation. (1977). Mental retardation: Past and present. Washington, DC: Author.

Scheerenberger, R.C. (1987). A history of mental retardation: A quarter century of promise. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing.

Shapiro, J. P. (1993). No pity: People with disabilities forging a new civil rights movement. New York: Times Books.

Smith, J. D. (1985). Minds made feeble: The myth and legacy of the Kallikaks. Rockville, MD: Aspen Systems.

Tucker, B. P. (1992). The Americans with Disabilities Act: Interpreting the Title I regulations: The hard cases. Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy, 2 (1), 1--24.

Waston, S. D. (1993a, Winter). An alliance at risk: The disability movement and health care reform. The American Prospect, 12, 60--67.

Watson, S. D. (1993b). Reality ignored: Health reform and people with disabilities. Journal of American Health Policy, 3 (2), 49--54.

Watson, S. D. (1993c, March/April). A study in prejudice. The Disability Rag, 17--20.

Wehman, P. (1993). The ADA mandate for social change. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing.

Wright, B. (1983). Physical disability: A psychosocial approach (2nd ed.) New York: Harper & Row.

Ysseldyke, J. E., Algozzine, B., & Richey, L. (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: How many children are handicapped? Exceptional Children, 48, 531--534.

Zola, I. K. (1982). Missing pieces. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Zuckerman, D. (1993). Reasonable accommodations for people with mental illness under the ADA. Mental and Physical Disability Law Reporter, 17 (3), 311--320.

 
    Article A16014006
    
 

View other articles linked to these subjects:

 Capacity and Disability - Social Aspects
Capacity and Disability - Social Aspects View 4 Periodical references 4 Periodical references
Capacity and Disability - Social Aspects See also 28 other subdivisions 28 other subdivisions
 Disability - Analysis
Disability - Analysis View 41 Periodical references 41 Periodical references
Disability - Analysis See also 64 other subdivisions 64 other subdivisions
 Disabled Persons - Laws, Regulations and Rules
Disabled Persons - Laws, Regulations and Rules View 539 Periodical references 539 Periodical references
Disabled Persons - Laws, Regulations and Rules See also 132 other subdivisions 132 other subdivisions

 Policy Studies Journal, Dec 22, 1993
Policy Studies Journal, Dec 22, 1993 View other articles in this issue other articles in this issue

Library holdings and other related sources

Search UIUC Online Catalog for library copy & volume information Search UIUC Online Catalog for library copy & volume information

Print, e-mail, and other retrieval options

Browser Print — Full Text —
Reformat for printing (approximately 13 pages) from your browser. To return to InfoTrac, use the back function of your browser.

Acrobat Reader — Full Text —
Retrieve for viewing and printing from Acrobat™ Reader. Please allow a few minutes for the retrieval operation to complete (approximately 9 pages)

E-Mail Delivery — Full Text —
We will send a plain text version to the e-mail address you enter (e.g. bettyg@library.com).
E-Mail Address:
Subject
(defaults to title):


previous article   ——      Article 6 of 15      ——   next article

About Expanded Academic ASAP   Thomson - Gale logo    Copyright and Terms of Use

_http://infotrac.galegroup.com.proxy2.library.uiuc.edu/itw/infomark/139/638/87443561w7/purl=rc1_EAIM_0_A16014006&dyn=5!xrn_6_0_A16014006?sw_aep=uiuc_ucYtext/html 1\e{  ( 1wa4=#$%%%%)p-K--123#3,3578899=ZArAAAF%IJ6J?JHNOPP&P/TwUUUUZ;[N[[[` a agapayejjcjljunop&p/t~zBzz~'DMV+4}8AJS\"+IO6}