Running Head: BIAS FREE FRAMEWORK ASSIGNMENT 1

The BIAS FREE Framework Assignment

Katie Hall

UCID: 10139442

CORE 205: Introduction to Disability Studies

Professor Gregor Wolbring & Professor Patti Desjardine

October 22nd 2015

BIAS FREE FRAMEWORK ASSIGNMENT 2
Table 1a: Maintaining an Existing Hierarchy

Type of Bias Diagnostic Questions Response/Example

H H1 Denying An example of an existence of a hierarchy, which is denied, in

Maintaining Hierarchy: Is the spite of widespread evidence to the contrary, is largely visible
an Existing existence of a in the hierarchy of social preference of disabilities. While
Hierarchy hierarchy denied in many would be quick to deny they would designate preference
spite of widespread for an individual with a physical disability over another with a
evidence to the mental or cognitively related disability, evidence from
contrary? multiple sources argues the opposite is true for the majority in
society (Bachelder & Braddock, 1994). Hughes (2011)
conducted a survey on disability hierarchy, which largely
suggests that some disabilities are viewed as less favorable
than others, and thus individuals with certain disabilities are at
an increased risk for discrimination and stigmatization. One of
the major findings from this study found that disabilities such
as dementia and autism, which can affect cognitive
functioning, were ranked significantly as least favorable when
in comparison to disabilities affecting solely the physicality of
individuals such as a cleft palate (Hughes, 2011). Another
extensive research study examining the existence of disability
hierarchy shows parallel results, maintaining the highest
ranked disabilities being physically related, or sensory
impacting such as deafness or a visual disability (Tringo,
1970). Further, disabilities that were found to be consistently
ranked lowest by the vast majority of those surveyed included
mental retardation, alcoholism and mental illness (Tringo, p.
304). Thus, while many would be quick to deny that a
hierarchy exists, evidence points to the contrary. A social
construct despondently does exist that makes certain types of
disabilities more acceptable in society than others.
H2 Maintaining An example of practices and views that are based on a
Hierarchy: Are hierarchy, which are presented as normal is the instance of
practices or views that prenatal genetic testing. Prenatal genetic testing, as well as
are based on a prenatal de-selection is the process of providing parents with
hierarchy presented as information regarding a developing fetus (Acharya, 2011). In
normal or un- some cases where an abnormality or disabling condition is
problematic? detected, the operating doctor or physician may present the
option of terminating the pregnancy. A few of the most
common methods are chorionic villus sampling, and
amniocentesis, where the cells taken can be analyzed to
determine the presence or lack thereof of genetic
abnormalities (ONeil, 2012).
These kinds of procedures are becoming increasingly routine,
exposing that this practice based upon a hierarchy employing
disability as an unwanted characteristic, is not only seen as un-
BIAS FREE FRAMEWORK ASSIGNMENT 3
problematic, but is in fact becoming a norm (Jackson, n.d.).
The notion of termination due to genetic abnormality, or
chance of, goes to show that even embryos and fetuses with an
irregularity, are not given the same moral status as fetuses
without. This notion of coveting traits, which are seen as
normative, and shying away from defective traits as the
medical profession chooses to call them goes to show that we
already are engaging in a form of bottom-up eugenics
(Kukla & Wayne, 2011). In many cultures, this practice and
viewpoint is largely seen as ethically permissible, and occurs
more often than many would think. In 2013, across the
province of Ontario, 70% of women underwent prenatal
genetic screening practices (Association of Ontario Midwives,
2013). Therefore, this effectively substantiates that it is in fact
normal to many and viewed as largely unproblematic within
our country to elect to undergo screening procedures to
determine if a fetus in fact has a genetic irregularity, or a
disability. Furthermore, choosing to terminate a pregnancy
due to the possibility or presentation of a disabling condition
is as well often viewed as acceptable, and un-problematic.
H3 Dominant An example of a perspective or standpoint of a dominant
perspective: Is the group being adopted is in the nature that of society often
perspective or viewing disability through a medical model. This model views
standpoint of the disability as being largely negative in nature, and something
dominant group within an individual that should be fixed or minimized.
adopted? The World Health Organization (1980) released a definition
for disability as any restriction or lack (resulting from an
impairment) of ability to perform an activity in the manner or
within the range considered normal for a human being. (p.
28). Although, years later and following many revisions to this
definition, the perspective on disability still emulates this
dominant view of disability as a defect, and burden within an
individual, rather than a part of human diversity. The World
Health Organization now uses words such as impairments,
activity limitations, participation restrictions and problem
in its current up to date fashion of defining disability. This
goes to show that while steps toward acceptance, and
eliminating ableism have been made, there still exists this
medicalized model accepted and adopted throughout society.
The very notion that the majority of individuals view anything
differing from the norm in society as a disability, or as
something that is a burden, goes to show that the standpoint
created by individuals without a disability is adopted, widely
used and accepted throughout society.
Customarily, our society has created a culture and notion that
non-normative structure or function are automatically
regarded as defects and burdens, rather than as variance from
the norm and part of human diversity (Burke & Eichler,
2006, p. 8). This standpoint is adopted in large part throughout
BIAS FREE FRAMEWORK ASSIGNMENT 4
society, and is thus a blatant example of a dominant
perspective bias at work, which continues to be adopted by a
large majority of society.
H4 Normalization: An example of normalization can be seen in norm-referenced
Are norms derived testing, which is largely used in educational settings for
from the dominant children. Norm-referenced testing takes a population of people
group then applied to who are given the same exact test, and from these results
the non-dominant creates a normal curve for dynamics such as intelligence,
group without behavior, or academic achievement, which represents the
questioning their average derived from the population tested beforehand (Ford,
relevance? 2009). One major issue is often these types of tests, which are
predominately derived from a dominant group or favor one
kind of learning manner, are then applied to a number of
different subjects or non-dominant groups such as children
with disabilities. This is an exhibition of a type of
normalization, as these results and norms are applied to non-
dominant groups results without stopping to question its
relevance whatsoever. Furthermore, these tests fail to take into
account the varying learning or communication modes that
many non-dominant groups may employ or use, and therefore
could deem them as being below the norm or below
average, just because they do not do things or understand
things the way the dominant group that was tested did.
Taking facts, or numbers enumerated from a dominant group
that is tested, and applying them to a non-dominant group
without questioning relevancy to determine things such as
intelligence or normalcy, will present misconstrued results.
Standardized assessments, and norm-referenced testing within
educational sectors shows how norms are often derived from a
dominant group or under a hierarchical practice, and applied
without questioning their relevance, thus clearly presenting a
normalization bias at work.
H5 An example of pathologization can be seen in how individuals
Pathologization: Is with disabilities are often viewed as being deficient or
the non-dominant defective. Take for instance the varying means of
group defined as communication that are used by individuals who have
deficient when it different disabilities. Often times, if someone does not
differs from the norms communicate verbally, deviating from a norm of the so-called
derived from the dominant group within society, it is viewed as a deficiency as
dominant group? it deviates from the traditional archetype of a normative body
(Kestrell, 2006). This goes for communicating by means of
technology, using various assistive devices, or even by braille
or sign language. Because a person is using a varying mode of
communication style, which differs from a norm derived from
the dominant group of society, it is seen as abnormal, and
treated as so, instead of a differing mode of doing things.
The same definition of deficiency is largely given to
individuals who use assistive devices to move around, such as
wheelchairs, scooters, prosthetics, ambulation aids, or
BIAS FREE FRAMEWORK ASSIGNMENT 5
orthotics (Gouvernement du Quebec, 2015). Because walking
as a customary means for mobility has been derived from a
dominant group, devices used to facilitate movement are seen
as being needed due to a deficiency. In fact, a description of
some of these mobility and assistive devices are described as
being designed to correct a deficient function, to compensate
for a deficiency, or to increase the physiological performance
of the trunk or of a limb that has lost its primary function
(Gouvernement du Quebec, 2015, para. 7). Therefore, due to
examples such as these ones explained, it can be seen that
disabled individuals are in some cases defined as deficient
when they differ from norms derived from a dominant group
within society.
H6 Objectification: An example of objectification within society, and stripping
Is stripping people of people of their intrinsic dignity and personhood can be seen in
their intrinsic dignity the use of improper language in society that fails to focus on
and personhood an individual person, and instead on qualities or characteristics
presented as normal of a person such as their disability. Throughout the years,
or unproblematic? certain slang words, racial slurs, and other improper language
that strips people of their personhood has slowly become less
and less acceptable for people to use, thus forcing it out of
many persons vocabularies. However, this movement has not
quite yet made its rounds to the disability community, as often
in society people are heard using language such as retarded
or vegetable. These are dehumanizing words that people
still do this day seem to believe is acceptable to use, in
judging that they are still heard to this day, even around the
university campus. When people use the word retard, it is
effectively stripping people with disabilities of their dignity as
well as personhood. Language, and the way it is used is so
incredibly important, as when it is used incorrectly in any
setting which places a characteristic of the person, or a
derogatory term first to identify them, it is essentially
dehumanizing them. Furthermore, within society, when people
use the R word as a synonym for something foolish, stupid,
or silly, they are effectively equating intellectual disability
with something negative, and thus stripping those with
disabilities of their personhoods. Unfortunately, the use of
such words appears to present as unproblematic to many, as
this language surrounding the notion of disability is still used
flippantly throughout society (Santillano, n.d.). In reality,
these words and language concerning the notion of ableism
need to be phased out of acceptable language usage in society,
just as slurs and language has in the past regarding issues of
racism and sexism.
H7 Victim An example of victims of violence being blamed and held
blaming: Are victims accountable can be largely seen in how in some cases,
of personal or perpetrators of rape or sexual violence are not fully held
societal/systemic accountable or blamed. Instead, victims of sexual violence or
BIAS FREE FRAMEWORK ASSIGNMENT 6
violence blamed and rape are sometimes blamed for having a part in the event.
held accountable? Assigning some degree of blame to a victim of rape is not
uncommon by observers and outsiders in our society (Bieneck
& Krahe, 2011). Victims of sexual assault are often subject to
victim blaming tendencies from others, which has become an
all too common reaction to violence (Horzepa, 2011). Specific
examples of victim blaming that can be found largely in
publicized instances of rape and sexual violence include;
asking what the victim did to provoke the attack, blaming their
type of dress or demeanor as bringing the attack on, as well as
placing responsibility on the victim for being inebriated, or
being in the wrong place at the wrong time (Niemi & Young,
2014). These various victims of violence are blamed, and
wrongly held accountable, or as being partially responsible for
such an event occurring for them.
H8 Appropriation: An example of when ownership by a dominant group is
Is ownership claimed claimed for entities or ideas that belong to or originated in a
by the dominant non-dominant group can be seen in cases of academic
group for entities that exploitation. The specific cases that will be examined are
originate(d) in or when women were robbed of recognition in their careers, or
belong to the non- ideas of theirs were wrongly claimed by another entity. These
dominant group? specific acts have often been labeled as acts of sexism, where
males are seen as the dominant group claiming ownership for
ideas created by women. National Geographic outlined
various cases when women endured indignities to their ideas,
as the scientific world during those times was extremely male
dominated (Lee, 2013). In fact, it was normal for women to
see the credit for significant discoveries theyve made
assigned to male colleagues (Lee, 2013, para. 5), or being
written out of textbooks altogether. While the lists of female
scientists that have experienced the effects of sexism in a male
dominated field are weighty, one specific example is the
widely known instance of Rosalind Franklin. In her case her
discoveries regarding the molecular structure of DNA had
being claimed by a dominant male group (Lee, 2013). James
Watson, Francis Crick, and Maurice Wilkins, all male
scientists, received the Nobel Prize in medicine for their work
on the DNA double helix (Lloyd, 2010). However, many
researchers, and advocates within the scientific community
argued that Franklin deserved more recognition for her
contributions to this scientific discovery. The reason for this
being that her images which initially revealed DNA as being
made up of two helices were shared with the male scientists,
allegedly without her permission (Lloyd, 2010). Her name is
rarely mentioned, or given credit where it is due, an injustice
many females before and following her have been subject to
as well. This instance is one of many where ideas have been
appropriated from a non-dominant group and claimed as a
member of the dominant groups own.
BIAS FREE FRAMEWORK ASSIGNMENT 7

Table 1b: Failing to Examine Differences

Type of Bias Diagnostic Questions Response/Example

F Failing F1 Insensitivity to An example of insensitivity to difference is the lack of
to Examine difference: Has the consideration in the framework of intake forms at hospitals,
Differences relevance of among other settings, which are not extensive or inclusive of
membership in various family structures, gender or sexual preference. Often,
dominant/non- forms are based on the assumptions of a heterosexual family
dominant group been structure, and fail to recognize the varying family dynamics
ignored? that exist in society. Usually forms require info on a mother
and a father, however this poses as extremely problematic
and insensitive to various families structures, as well as sexual
or gender preferences. This example shows how the relevance
of membership of those with varying sexual preferences, or
gender identities has been outright and blatantly ignored in
such a massive component in our society. This is a huge
insensitivity to difference, as it is assuming that all people
follow a dominant group of society in having one mother
and father, or one male and female in a family structure or
relationship.
Is F2 An example of decontextualization can be largely seen in
membership Decontextualization: infrastructure design, or city planning processes, which fail to
in a non- Has the different recognize the importance of universally accessible and
dominant social reality of inclusive designs. Universal design is described as designing
group dominant and non- facilities, services, or infrastructure for individuals with a
examined as dominant groups broad range of abilities, or social realities, such as individuals
socially explicitly been with disabilities (Burgstahler, 2012).
relevant and considered? Often different social realities, and varying needs of non-
accommodat dominant groups are explicitly forgotten, ignored, or failed to
ed? be taken into account to a high enough degree to ensure things
are accessible, and equitable for all. Often services or designs
of infrastructure such as the buildings on our university
campus are designed with the average user or dominant
group in mind. Planning processes more often than not fail to
recognize the varying needs of people who may use assistive
devices, or populations that have a different social and
contextual reality than the dominant group within society.
This example shows how in many cases different social
realities are never explicitly considered, and instead the
dominant groups reality is solely taken into consideration.
F3 Over- An example of over-generalization and/or universalization can
generalization or be found in some of the universalizing and generalizing
universalization: Is tendencies authors and researchers within the global north
information derived have in writings pertaining to disability (Spaulding, 2015). It
from dominant groups is well-known fact that disability studies was constructed as a
generalized to non- field of knowledge without reference to the theorists, or the
BIAS FREE FRAMEWORK ASSIGNMENT 8
dominant groups social experience, of the global south (Meekosha, 2010, p.
without examining if 668). The realities of experiences throughout the globe are
it is applicable to the vastly different, however this form of scholarly colonialism
non-dominant groups? (Meekosha, 2010, p. 668) that is employed, fails to take into
account the different realities of the millions of disabled
people around the globe. Experiences are generalized from the
global north to the global south, without examining
applicability.
Connell (2007) argues that disability studies within the field
almost never cite researchers or thinkers from outside the
global north (Meekosha, 2010). Thus, these realities and
experiences of disability are ignored, even though they are
extremely pertinent to the field as the global south is largely
impacted by disability.
Disability studies, theories, and facts should be inclusive of all
areas around the globe, as assuming that information derived
from the global north is applicable in all other settings is false.
Disability is not a universally understood or experienced
entity, as different cultures and areas of the globe maintain
different interpretations as well as causal factors for disability
(Meekosha, 2010). By generalizing information derived from
dominant groups within society, such as the global north
experiences of disability, to other groups, is failing to
recognize that the two are largely not applicable in many
ways. In the lack of geopolitical referencing being used,
pertinent knowledge, facts, and statistics are failing to be
recognized, that are in fact applicable to the majority of
individuals around the globe with disabilities.
Using information, facts, and theories derived from dominant
groups within the global north, and generalizing it to the
global south without examining its applicability is a perfect
example of overgeneralization as well as universalization of
disability.
F4 Assumed An example of an assumed homogeneity is largely seen in the
homogeneity: Is the assumption some people make that individuals with the same
dominant or non- condition, disability, or diagnosis have the same needs, and
dominant group thus should be treated as a uniform group. In reality people
treated as a uniform can have completely differing needs, and thus require different
group? supports, aid, and care. Treating disability as a uniform entity,
or as a homogenous whole denies the diversity of what
disability encompasses, and even further fails to recognize the
individuals aspects that make up who people are.
Sometimes individuals are seen and defined foremost by the
label of disabled, or by their particular kind or type of
disability. However, it is crucial to emphasize the person first,
and refrain from treating individuals with disabilities as a
uniform group. Disability does not define a person, nor should
it permit the allowance for people with disabilities to be
treated as a uniform group.
BIAS FREE FRAMEWORK ASSIGNMENT 9
A specific example of this could be in individuals with
cerebral palsy. Often, because individuals have the same
diagnosis, they are automatically labeled as so, and treated
uniformly. However, the ways in which individuals
experience cerebral palsy may differ in various ways. One
individual may need more supports than another, and use
assistive devices to write, walk or communicate. Another
individual could be independent in all of those ways, however.
The fact that they have cerebral palsy should not be the
defining factor, used to label individuals as a homogenous
group, but society does show tendencies to treat a non-
dominant group uniformly without realizing the various
differences encompassed within the group. Assuming that
because both individuals have cerebral palsy, that they are the
same, and have the same needs, is a blatant example of
assumed homogeneity bias at work.
BIAS FREE FRAMEWORK ASSIGNMENT 10
Table 1c: Using Double Standards

Type of Bias Diagnostic Questions Response/Example

D Using D1 Overt double An example of how non-dominant and dominant groups are
Double standards: Are non- treated unequally is in how some school settings have
Standards dominant and segregated classrooms, or fail to operate under an inclusive
dominant groups education and social setting for both children with and without
treated unequally? special needs. The struggle for inclusion lies within the long
term and ongoing systemic devaluation of people with
disabilities (Uditsky, 1993). Unicef maintains that the
resources allocated for children with disabilities tends to be
allocated to segregated schools, rather than to an inclusive
mainstream education system (United Nations Childrens
Fund, 2013, p. 9). The notion that separate schools, and
separate classrooms for children with deemed as having
special needs or a disability goes to show that children with
disabilities are not treated in equal ways in some cases.
Children without a disability are allowed to attend mainstream
schooling without question, or concern. However, often the
process it not as easy, and seen as acceptable, or allowable for
a child with a disability to attend a mainstream school, and not
in a segregated classroom.
Are non- D2 An example of underrepresentation or exclusion can be seen
dominant/do Underrepresentation within employment sectors. Various policies, laws, and
minant or exclusion: Are legislations have been passed to help protect the rights of
groups dealt non-dominant groups persons with disabilities from discrimination, specifically
with under-represented or within workplace settings. However, underemployment and
differently? excluded? disparity between persons with and without disabilities still
exists and is present in various workforces (Doyle, Thomas, &
Vaughn, 2011). Findings regarding the population of
unemployed individuals in Canada with disabilities show that
in 2011 the employment rate of individuals aged 25 to 64
with disabilities was 49%, compared with 79% for Canadians
without a disability (Turcotte, 2014). Another statistic,
coming from within the United States, mirrors the under-
representation of persons with disabilities in the workforce
seeing only 39.3% of adults being employed, compared to
77.8% of individuals without a disability being employed
(Doyle, Thomas, & Vaughn, 2011; Erickson, Lee, & von
Schrader, 2010).
It is easy to see that despite laws and policies, which are put in
place to prevent exclusive tendencies, persons with disabilities
still remain severely under-represented within the workforce,
as well as remain less likely than others to obtain employment
(Turcotte, 2014).
D3 Exceptional An example of exceptional under-representation or exclusion
under-representation can be seen within the education system, regarding
BIAS FREE FRAMEWORK ASSIGNMENT 11
or exclusion: In Individualized Education Programs, or specialized plans and
contexts normally approaches for a child. In order to qualify for an
associated with non- Individualized Education Program in a classroom, a child
dominant groups, but must be meet the eligibility criteria, and in cases more often
pertinent to all groups, than not, in order to qualify a child has to have a medical
is the dominant group diagnosed disability from a professional (Neuro Assessment
underrepresented or and Development Center, 2015). This means that a child, who
excluded? may not present with a diagnosable, or evident disability,
often cannot get individualized help or a personal learning
plan.
Children of all abilities learn at varying levels, and regardless
of whether or not they have a disability, having the
opportunity to get a personalized plan for educational methods
is something any child could benefit from. A child could have
a genius level IQ, but the fact of the matter is that intelligence
has no bearing on disability or the level of attention a child
needs or deserves. A child could be dealing with a number of
things that affect their ability to access curriculum or
understand it in a way that is beneficial to them and suits their
particular needs. But unless it falls into a category that labels
them as disabled, they could be turned away, and fail to get
one on one attention.
Getting personalized care, and having things adapted to better
suit a childs needs is something that is pertinent and
important to all groups, and children of all abilities. But,
generally, it is difficult for children without having a
medically diagnosable disability, or one which is deemed
severe enough, to qualify to receive extra attention or
individualized help in a school setting. Thus, many children,
which could be considered within the dominant group who
do not have a disability, who could still truly benefit from a
specialized learning plan are often underrepresented or
excluded. Receiving specialized care, and adapted educational
methods of learning is something that is pertinent and
important to all, and should not be something as seen solely
within the context of special education, but instead in all
mainstream education as well.
D4 Denying An example of denying agency pertains to the way that some
agency: Is there a people in society assume that individuals are incapable of
failure to consider making decisions about their own lives, and practicing agency
non- in everyday decisions. Often times, individuals without
dominant/dominant disabilities are absolved of the ability to act on their own
groups as both actors behalf, effectively incapacitating them (MacNail, 2012). Often
and acted upon? there is an immense failure to consider individuals with
disabilities as being both acted upon, as well as actors within
their own lives, capable of making decisions and operating in
their own self-interests. In my own work within the realm of
the disability field, I have experienced this often when I am
out in the community working with a client or participant.
BIAS FREE FRAMEWORK ASSIGNMENT 12
People often look to me, the aide, for a decision to be made
regarding whomever I am with, effectively denying the
agency of the individual I am supporting. This can be seen in a
situation such as ordering food at a restaurant, where people
fail to recognize that these individuals with disabilities are
fully capable of voicing what they would like, and are actors
in their own lives. Instead, individuals assume people with
disabilities always have decisions made on or expressed on
their behalf by parents, aides, or other professionals (Burke,
2006). Dominant groups within society often times treat
people with disabilities in a manner that suggests they are
incapable of making decisions, and acting upon them
themselves. By failing to consider individuals with disabilities
as both actors and acted upon, the slogan nothing about us
without us (Charlton, 1998, p.3), which is largely used by the
disability community, being ignored. Furthermore, it is the
failure to consider people with disabilities as both actors and
acted upon, effectively denying their agency and level of
ability.
D5 Treating An example of this type of bias is seen largely within the class
dominant opinions as system in society, pertaining to opinions derived from the
facts: Are opinions working class regarding individuals who are without work or
expressed by a homeless. Often times, the opinions of a dominant group in
dominant group about society are taken as fact, rather than the individual opinions
a non-dominant group that they are. Such opinions could be that a person who is
treated as opinion or without work is lazy, or that they are homeless at the fault of
fact? their own (Strauss, 2013). In reality, these outsider
perspectives are entirely subjective, as they are not the ones
actually experiencing it, and knowing of the reality of the
situation. However, more often than not, people take these
opinions that people who are not able to find work or are
homeless are lazy, and treat them as fact, failing to question
that it is in fact opinion based upon hierarchy (Strauss, 2013).
The reality could be entirely different than these dominant
opinions, as people could be homeless due to a variety of
circumstances such as abuse, disability, lost work, lack of
affordable housing, as well as many others (The Suitcase
Clinic, 2014). Some people within society fail to stop to
contemplate the various possible reasons for someone being
homeless, and instead treat the opinions expressed by a
dominant, working group of society as fact without a second
thought or inquiry.
D6 Stereotyping: An example of stereotyping is when people assume that a
Are stereotypes of disability needs to be visible or blatantly obvious to an
non- outsider, to still be considered a disability. Often when the
dominant/dominant term disability is used, many people automatically assume
groups treated as that it must be an obvious physical impairment, or a sensory
essential aspects of disability such as having a visual deficiency (Santuzzi, 2013).
group membership? This misconception is common, triggered by lack of
BIAS FREE FRAMEWORK ASSIGNMENT 13
understanding, and by stereotypes that have been fashioned
and created in the minds of individuals within society. In
reality, disabilities do not have to be visible or physical,
however many still treat it as being essential to being
considered disabled. Many disabilities are largely invisible,
yet the majority of people believe a disability refers to people
using assistive devices (Invisible Disabilities Association,
2015). Invisible disabilities can be just as impactful on an
individual, yet they are often invalidated, as they are not seen
from an onlooker or outsiders perspective. Thus, while having
a physical impairment is usually the stereotype people
fashion in their minds regarding disability, this is seemingly
not indicative of what disability is nor all that disability
encompasses. The stereotype that a person with a disability
must have it be visible is not an essential aspect of group
membership that it is treated as.
D7 Exaggerating An example of a bias, which exaggerates differences, can be
differences: Are seen in the view that disabled people cannot be self sufficient,
overlapping traits and are excessively dependent upon assistance by non-
treated as if they were disabled individuals (Barnes, 1992). In reality, individuals
characteristic of only who are not disabled can be just as dependent or
non- interdependent on others as a person who happens to have a
dominant/dominant disability. Many people who have both physical, or cognitive
groups? disabilities are self-reliant, and able to do many things on their
own, without the help of another. Being dependent, and
needing assistance is not a characteristic of solely individuals
with disabilities. Anybody, no matter their ability could be
reliant and dependent upon those around them for assistance
or support. Hardwood and Giles (2005) state that often
witnessing one instance of dependence causes the
nondisabled to overgeneralize that an individual is dependent
in every situation (p. 121). In fact, people with and without
disabilities can have varying levels of dependence and
interdependence, however often this trait of dependency is
exaggerated to be characteristic of mainly those with
disabilities. Dependency is an overlapping trait within all
groups of society, however often it is treated as if it is solely a
characteristic pertaining to individuals with disabilities.
BIAS FREE FRAMEWORK ASSIGNMENT 14
D8 Hidden double An example of a hidden double standard can be seen in
standards: Are various workplaces, in cases when men and women doing the
different criteria used exact same work, are given different titles, to allow for pay of
to define comparable different salaries. While many countries, including Canada
facts with the effect of have laws in place that state it is a human right to pay equity
hiding their regardless of gender, it is found that employers circumvent
comparability? such laws by simply giving men and women different working
descriptions or titles (Cramer & Creedon, 2007, p. 169).
A double standard can be defined as a code or policy that
favors one group or person over another (Vocabulary.com,
n.d.). Thus, the double standard that exists in this example is
the unequal pay of men and women for similar work, favoring
one group over the other. The work that is often done is
completely comparable and equitable to one another, yet the
use of different job descriptions is effectively hiding the
comparability between the two. The use of different titles or
job descriptions is a strategy that workplaces employ,
attempting to hide the use of different treatments for non-
dominant and dominant groups. Therefore, different pay for
equal work in the workplace by means of defining the jobs
using different measures or principles shows the effects of a
hidden double standard at work in society.
BIAS FREE FRAMEWORK ASSIGNMENT 15
References

Acharya, K. (2011). Prenatal testing for intellectual disability: Misperceptions and reality with lessons

from down syndrome. Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 17(1), 21-31.

doi: 10.1002/ddrr.135

Association of Ontario Midwives. (2013, June). AOM position paper: Prenatal genetic screening.

Retrieved from

http://www.aom.on.ca/files/Communications/Position_Statements/AOM_position_paper_Prena

tal_Genetic_Screening.pdf

Bachelder, L., & Braddock, D. (1994, February 24) The glass ceiling and persons with disabilities.

Retrieved from

http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1115&context=key_workplac

Barnes, C. (1992, March 25). Disabling imagery and the media: An exploration of the principles for

media representations of disabled people. Retrieved from http://disability-

studies.leeds.ac.uk/files/library/Barnes-disabling-imagery.pdf

Bieneck, S., & Krahe, B. (2011). Blaming the victim and exonerating the perpetrator in cases of rape

and robbery: Is there a double standard? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26, 17851797.

doi:10.1177/0886260510372945

Burgstahler, S. (2012). Equal access: Universal design of physical spaces. Retrieved from

http://www.washington.edu/doit/equal-access-universal-design-physical-spaces

Burke, M. A., & Eichler, M. (2006). The bias free framework: A practical tool for identifying and

eliminating social biases in health research. Retrieved from

https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/9581/1/BIASFree_interieur.pdf
BIAS FREE FRAMEWORK ASSIGNMENT 16
Charlton, J. I. (1998). Nothing about us without us: Disability oppression and empowerment. Available

from

https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Nothing_about_Us_Without_Us.html?id=ohqff8DBt9g

Connell, R. W. (2007). Southern theory: Social science and the global dynamics of knowledge. Sydney:

Polity Press.

Cramer, J., & Creedon, P. J. (2007). Women in mass communication: Third edition. Available from

https://books.google.ca/books?id=OW9_yXCRkucC&dq=giving+men+and+women+doing+the

+same+work+different+titles

Doyle, A. L., Thomas, A., & Vaughn, E. D. (2011). The multiple disability implicit association test:

Psychometric analysis of a multiple administration IAT measure. Rehabilitation Counseling

Bulletin 54(4), 223-235. doi: 10.1177/0034355211403008

Erickson, W., Lee, C., & von Schrader, S. (2010). Disability statistics from the 2008 American

Community Survey (ACS). Retrieved from http://disabilitystatistics.org

Ford, H. (2009, December 23). Norm-referenced testing. Retrieved from

http://www.education.com/reference/article/norm-referenced-testing/

Gouvernement du Quebec. (2015). Aid Programs: Devices that compensate for a physical deficiency.

Retrieved from http://www.ramq.gouv.qc.ca/en/citizens/aid-programs/devices-compensate-

physical-deficiency/Pages/devices-compensate-physical-deficiency.aspx

Hardwood, J., & Giles, H. (2005). Intergroup communication: Multiple perspectives. Retrieved from

https://books.google.ca/books?id=SYWOblxkmkQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Intergroup+co

mmunication:+Multiple+perspectives.&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CBwQ6AEwAGoVChMIpZzcvM

_SyAIVCDeICh2Q9Qka#v=onepage&q=Intergroup%20communication%3A%20Multiple%20

perspectives.&f=false
BIAS FREE FRAMEWORK ASSIGNMENT 17
Horzepa, H. R. (2011, April 22). Victim blaming: an all too common response to sexual assault.

Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hayley-rose-horzepa/victim-

blaming_b_847310.html

Hughes, S. (2011, November). Communication disorders and the hierarchy of disability. Annual

Convention of the American Speech, Language, and Hearing Association. San Diego, CA.

Invisible Disabilities Association. (2015). What is an invisible disability? Retrieved from

http://invisibledisabilities.org/what-is-an-invisible-disability/

Jackson, E. (n.d.). Reproduction, genetics, and the rule of law: Session 3 designer babies, genetic risk,

and paranoia. Retrieved from

http://fathom.lse.ac.uk/Seminars/21701786/21701786_session3.html

Kestrell, S. M. (2006). Decloaking disability: Images of disability and technology in science fiction

media. Retrieved from http://cmsw.mit.edu/alicia-kestrell-verlager-images-of-disability-and-

technology-in-science-fiction-media/

Kukla, R., & Wayne, K. (2011, February 17). Pregnancy, birth, and medicine. Retrieved from

http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2015/entries/ethics-pregnancy/

Lee, J. J. (2013, May 19). 6 women scientists who were snubbed due to sexism. Retrieved from

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/13/130519-women-scientists-overlooked-dna-

history-science/

Lloyd, R. (2010, November 3). Rosalind franklin and dna: How wronged was she? Retrieved from

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/rosalind-franklin-and-dna-how-wronged-was-

she/

MacNeil, J. (2012, April 26). Reframing disability: An analysis of disability concepts and policies

using the bias free framework. Retrieved from http://pdfsr.com/pdf/reframing-disability-with-

the-bias-free-framework
BIAS FREE FRAMEWORK ASSIGNMENT 18
Meekosha, H. (2010). Decolonising disability: Thinking and acting globally. Disability & Society, 26,

667-682. Retrieved from

http://www.academia.edu/1079778/Decolonising_disability_thinking_and_acting_globally

Neuro Assessment & Development Center (2015). Determining eligibility for an iep. Retrieved from

http://neurodevelop.com/IEP_Determining_Eligibility

Niemi, L., & Young, L. (2014). Blaming the victim in the case of rape. Psychological Inquiry: An

International Journal for the Advancement of Psychological Theory, 25, 230-233. doi:

10.1080/1047840X.2014.901127

ONeil, D. (2012). Detection. Retrieved from http://anthro.palomar.edu/abnormal/abnormal_2.htm

Santillano, V. (n.d.). The great r-word debate: Is it ever okay to say? Retrieved from

http://www.divinecaroline.com/entertainment/great-r-word-debate-it-ever-okay-say

Santuzzi, A. M. (2013, June 26). Invisible disabilities: the challenges of identifying and disclosing

disabilities that others cant see. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-

wide-wide-world-psychology/201306/invisible-disabilities

Spaulding, C. (2015). Disability in the global south. [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from

https://d2l.ucalgary.ca/d2l/le/106803/discussions/posts/715509/ViewAttachment?fileId=647437

Strauss, V. (2013, October 28). Five stereotypes about poor families and education. Retrieved from

The Suitcase Clinic. (2014). Homelessness defined. Retrieved from

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2013/10/28/five-stereotypes-about-

poor-families-and-education/http://www.suitcaseclinic.org/homelessness-defined/

Tringo, J. L. (1970). The hierarchy of preference toward disability groups. Journal of Special

Education, 4, 295-306. doi: 10.1177/002246697000400306

Turcotte, M. (2014, March 12). Persons with disabilities and employment. Retrieved from

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-006-x/2014001/article/14115-eng.htm
BIAS FREE FRAMEWORK ASSIGNMENT 19
Uditsky, B. (1993) From integration to inclusion: The canadian experience. In Slee, R. (Ed.), Is there a

desk with my name on it? The politics of integration. London: The Falmer Press.

United Nations Childrens Fund. (2013, May). The state of the worlds children 2013 executive

summary: Children with disabilities. Retrieved from

http://www.unicef.org/guyana/SOWC_2013_Executive_Summary.pdf

Vocabulary.com. (n.d.). Double standard. Retrieved from

http://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/double%20standard

World Health Organization. (1980) International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and

Handicaps: A Manual of Classification Relation to the Consequences of Disease. Geneva,

Switzerland: World Health Organization 1980.