Doctrine of Physical Perfection

[Tamrin]

What was arguably an Ancient Landmark of the Order, the Doctrine of Physical Perfection, also known as the Doctrine of the Perfect Youth, found within the Old Charges, is now widely considered to be more honoured in the breach than in the observance. So long as an aspirant has the intellectual capacity to do the work of a Free and Accepted or Speculative Freemason, (i.e., s/he can comprehend at least the basic moral lessons) s/he can be a member of most jurisdictions (albeit, some of those may still require a nominal dispensation). Thus, we read (J.W. Stubbs, "The Last Fifty Years," Grand Lodge 1717-1967, UGLE, p.162):

The end of the war [WW I] found the Craft prepared for a great rush of candidates, and as a sad corollary of war, for the consideration of the vexed question of maimed candidates. The Doctrine of Perfect Youth, which was an inheritance from Operative Masonry,was likely to debar many ex-Service men to no conceivable advantage, without at the same time putting any embargo on weakness of intellect. The Board [of General Purposes] took the view, and was supported by Grand Lodge [UGLE], that where a physical defect did not render a candidate incapable of learning the art there was no reason why he should not be initiated, provided he was able to understand the secrets and mysteries of the Craft and to explain or exemplify them when properly called upon. No one who has seen a blind Master or one disabled by 'polio' exercising authority in his Lodge will deny that this ruling has had beneficial results not only to the disabled Brethren but to Masonry in general.

(Sadly, after this honourable demonstration of common sense and humanity, in overturning what was effectively an Ancient Landmark of the Order, one reads in the next couple of pages of the same official history of UGLE, where the Grand Lodge, stubbornly entrenched its opposition to women being Freemasons, despite there being no sound case for their exclusion being among our Ancient Landmarks).

Given the welcome diversity of our membership with respect to disabilities, perhaps some observations on disability awareness might be appropriate. Over the last few semesters I have been called upon to represent my employer in speaking on the subject of disability related issues to Business Communication students at the local university. I have included a précis of my presentations below.

[Tamrin]

COMMUNICATING
WITH PEOPLE
(with a disability)

by Philip Carter

[/color][/b][/size][/center]
All of us have disabilities: Some have yet to identify theirs.

Most people will have a close relationship with at least one person with a significant disability which significantly impacts on their life, (although not necessarily on the quality of their life). Indeed, many of us will acquire one or more significant disabilities at some time, whether as a result of an accident, illness or aging.

One in five of all Australians currently have a significant disability and the numbers are increasing with the overall aging of the population. For instance the ratio increases from 1 in 5 overall, to 1 in 3 for those aged 55 (EMAD, #6, p.1).

Your present interest is principally focussed on communication with people in a business environment and, with the aging of the population; EEO policies; anti-discrimination laws; the government’s Welfare to Work program; and increasing skills shortages; the workforce participation of people with a disability will become increasingly significant, as will the need for effective workplace communication with this vastly diverse group.

A person’s disclosure of their disability is only mandatory where there is a genuine need to know, such as where it impacts on their ability to perform the inherent requirements of a job or where there are real OH&S concerns. Their permission is required to pass on such information and they may stipulate how their condition is to be described to others.

Employers are required to make reasonable adjustments to accommodate any special needs, if any, of a person with a disability, (please bear-in-mind that what is considered reasonable in one case may not be so in another).

Employers need to assess the genuine, core requirements of the job when determining selection criteria and give fair consideration to flexible work options for people with a disability (PWD). Larger employers may need to implement some Affirmative Actions strategies under their EEO policy, from recruitment and onwards to achieve more equitable representation of PWD at all levels of the company.

A person with a disability is first and foremost, a person—an individual who, with few exceptions, is the world’s foremost expert in their particular circumstances, including living with their disability and knowing what they can and cannot do. Just because you may know someone with a disability condition does not mean that assumptions derived from your knowledge of that person, both positive and negative, necessarily apply to another person with a similar condition. Thus, be careful about making assumptions made solely on the basis of a person having a disability or even on the type of disability.

Different people experience their disabilities in different ways. For instance, Special Olympian Oscar Pistorius, a sprinter using prothetic legs, has qualified to compete in world class open events—while some people with leg amputations may have profound difficulty just walking.

Similarly, Professor Stephen Hawkins is among the world’s foremost Physicists, while other people with his condition (Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis) may find that community attitudes contribute to their social isolation.

A person’s disability is not the sum total of their life. People with a disability have their strengths and weaknesses; their aspirations, victories and disappointments; their good days and their bad; and even their own prejudices. As with others, some are easily to like and some not so. Their lives are as diverse as anyone’s having family, spiritual, intellectual, vocational, community and recreational dimensions.

Accidents and illness are a part of life and, if fate allows, we will all age. With this in mind, Imagine waking up in a hospital bed to discover you suddenly have a disability and finding other treating you differently because you are now in another category, you are no longer one of ‘us’. You would want them to still treat you the same because you know You are the same: The same person! Thus, the individual should be shown respect and consulted as to their particular needs. Indeed, no exceptional help should be given without it being requested or without an offer of assistance being accepted.

Some of you may empathise with a person with a disability, if so you should usually keep it to yourself, as it may be mistaken for sympathy, which is rarely appropriate. Remember, sympathy is closely allied with pity, which erodes respect. By way of illustration, while we may love or hate someone who we respect, it is difficult to do so in relation to a person who we pity.

Please bear-in-mind that, both formally and informally, employers already extend many flexible arrangements to all employees, regardless of whether or not they have a significant disability. Employees with a disability will not necessarily require modifications to their job or to the workplace, beyond those extended to other employees. If and when modifications are required, they may qualify for funding assistance.

Being identified as a person with a disability carries with it various connotations, whether intended or not, and unnecessary comments may impinge on a person’s feeling of acceptance and dignity. In the workplace, mention of a person’s disability, other than by themselves, needs to be relevant to the situation and using the terms they find most acceptable. However, where a person’s disability is obviously relevant in a particular situation, avoiding mention of it may be equally demeaning.

[Tamrin]

General Principles:

Even well intentioned comments, such as expressing admiration about how well a person copes with their disability is usually inappropriate, as are questions as to the cause of their disability or even being too specific about the particular condition. General principles adapted from recommendations by a Victorian government agency are as follows:

To ensure that your communication with and about people with a disability is positive and inclusive:

• Put the person first, not their disability.
  
  For example, use the term ‘a person with a disability’, rather than ‘a disabled person’; or ‘a person who is blind’, rather than ‘a blind person’.
  
  
• Avoid stereotypes or labels, such as ‘the handicapped’, ‘the blind’ or ‘the disabled’.
  
  While many people may have the same or similar disabilities, they are all unique individuals who deserve to be treated with respect and dignity.
  
  
• Avoid using words and phrases that can be demeaning to people with a disability, such as handicapped, special, deaf and dumb, mental, invalid, wheelchair bound, confined to a wheelchair, retarded, etc.
  
  For example, use ‘people who use a wheelchair’, rather than words such as ‘crippled’, ‘wheelchair-bound’, ‘incapacitated’ and ‘suffering from’. Talk about ‘people without disabilities’, rather than ‘able-bodied’ or ‘normal’ people.
  
  
• Avoid the phrase ‘disabled toilet’.
  This phrase implies that the toilet is disabled, rather than being accessible to people with a disability. Use the phrase ‘accessible toilet’ instead.
  
  
• Avoid the phrase ‘disabled toilet’.
  This phrase implies that the toilet is disabled, rather than being accessible to people with a disability. Use the phrase ‘accessible toilet’ instead.
  
  
• Maintain normal eye contact (avoid inappropriate staring or looking away), smile as usual and use the person’s name where appropriate.

We can easily get bogged down in terminology, differentiating between impairment, disability and handicap. For our present purposes, suffice it to say that:

‘A person is regarded as having a disability if his or her impairment (or combination of impairments) is likely to be permanent and results in significantly reduced capacity in one or more major life activities.’

For example: ‘Spinal cord damage resulting in paraplegia is an impairment, the effect this has on a person’s ability to walk is a disability, difficulties with matters such as access to buildings, transport, employment and discriminatory attitudes are handicaps (disadvantages).’

[Tamrin]

Myths & Facts:

We should bear-in-mind that much of what we may think we know about people with a disability has no basis in fact. For instance:

Myth: Employees with disabilities have a higher absentee rate than employees without disabilities.

Fact: Studies by firms such as DuPont show that employees with disabilities are not absent any more than employees without disabilities.


Myth: Persons with disabilities are inspirational, courageous, and brave for being able to overcome their disability.

Fact: Persons with disabilities are simply carrying on normal activities of living when they drive to work, go grocery shopping, pay their bills, or compete in athletic events.


Myth: Persons with disabilities need to be protected from failing.

Fact: Persons with disabilities have a right to participate in the full range of human experiences including success and failure. Employers should have the same expectations of, and work requirements for, all employees.


Myth: Persons with disabilities are unable to meet performance standards, thus making them a bad employment risk.

Fact: In 1990, DuPont conducted a survey of 811 employees with disabilities and found 90% rated average or better in job performance compared to 95% for employees without disabilities. A similar 1981 DuPont study which involved 2,745 employees with disabilities found that 92% of employees with disabilities rated average or better in job performance compared to 90% of employees without disabilities. The 1981 study results were comparable to DuPont’s 1973 job performance study.


Myth: Persons with disabilities have problems getting to work.

Fact: Persons with disabilities are capable of supplying their own transportation by choosing to walk, use a car pool, drive, take public transportation, or a cab. Their modes of transportation to work are as varied as those of other employees.


Myth: Employees with disabilities are more likely to have accidents on the job than employees without disabilities.

Fact: In the 1990 DuPont study, the safety records of both groups were identical.


Conclusion:

I then devote considerable time to different approaches for communication with people with different specific disabilities and then conclude, saying:

As a person with a disability is, first and foremost, a person, it is therefore appropriate that the strategies appropriate for effectively communicating with them are broadly the same as those for effectively communicating with anyone. Everyone is entitled to be treated as an individual and the care you take in communicating with those who have a disability will help you to be a better, all-round communicator. Most of the strategies already described would be appropriate in any conversation.

Broadly, let people know the purpose of the session; be positive, direct and clear; repeat and rephrase important points and obtain feedback to verify comprehension. Stick to the point and do not over generalise or overly complicate. If you do not understand a question or response, do not pretend you do, ask for it to be repeated or rephrased and encourage the same approach from others. Face people and maintain normal eye contact; smile and use names where appropriate. Use graphics and gestures to illustrate ideas and give written summaries where appropriate.

Above all, treat everyone with dignity and respect. Simply follow the Golden Rule and do unto others as you would have them do unto you.