All right. All right. Were well just get going. Um, great. Okay, so hi everybody welcome to disability in American History and culture. Its great to see you all and hope you had a great spring breaks and so our plan for the day. Were gonna start with a review. I assume that you havent spent your spring break learn thinking about our class. So this is designed to just get you back on track to think about some of the most important themes and ideas that weve discussed in our class so far then ill lecture on the topic for todays class which is disability in the early United States. We will talk about how disability was defined in the years after the American Revolution how ableism shaped Early National law and have some disabled people push back and fought for greater access and equality. Okay. So for our review our class began, but thinking really complexly about the meaning and experience of disability. So we discussed primary models for conceptualizing disability the first was the medical model of disability and this is probably the most common understanding of disability in america today. In this Model Disability is viewed as an individual problem, right . So if someone has an impairment say a limb difference a visual limitation, this is seen as their disability. In the logic of the medical model disabilities are probably a problems that need to be fixed primarily by western medicine. So the goal of the medical model is to fix the individual right to fix the individuals impairment in order to fix or eradicate disability. The social model of disability stands in stark contrast to the medical model. It was developed by disabled people disability rights activists and it suggests instead that society disables people. People with impairments are disabled by the fact that they are excluded from full participation in main Street Society right that they experience these physical political social attitudinal barriers to equality. So according to the social model the negative effect negative effects of these socially constructed limitations far outweighs the negative effects of any physical intellectual impairment. As a result the social model is focusing in focused on fixing ableism fixing prejudice and discrimination and decide in society fixing disabled people. So from this beginning we went on to critique both the medical and social models. We decided that the medical model was pretty problematic in the blame and the stigma that it placed on individuals the ways that it view disability as an individual problem. We thought the social model was a lot better, but that there were still some drawbacks and this primary drawback was rooted to the social models glossing over or maybe even a denial of the real physical intellectual a sensory mobility limitations that people experience. Many of you pointed out that not all disabilities can be alleviated through social change. Others of you argued that some disabled people want to have their bodies fixed. Right, they want to have their pain alleviated and this is okay. So as a class, we we decided that combating ableist prejudice and discrimination does not have to mean a rejection of medicine. So many of us in our class settled on Tobin Siebers theory of complex embodiments as maybe the perfect median between the medical and social models of disability. Siebers argues that disability is produced both by social barriers and by physical and intellectual limitations, so its not one or the other its both. Moreover siebers argues that separating the disabilities that arise from the body and those that arise from society is pretty futile. These factors are inextricably linked so both body limitations and social barriers Work Together to construct disability. At the same time we developed this really deep and complex understanding of disability. We also thought a lot about ability. Ablebodiness ablebindedness many of you were quick to realize that a preference for ability a strong desire for health and capacity a celebration of able bodiness and able mightiness able mindedness this pervades our lives. We are constantly encouraged to be as smart as healthy and as healthy as we can be friends and family members are celebrated when they overcome or persevere past their disabilities and are in our own university. We see perfection and achievement valorist. The preference for able bodiness enablemindedness is really all around us. But in our class we attempted to question this device desire, right . We worked to think in new ways reading works by authors who claim disability as a positive identity and really a valuable way of living in the world. So we read authors who pushed back and and resisted this impulse to to ability in their lives. In thinking about ability and disability. We also always endeavor to think intersectionally, right . So we discussed how the category of disability is deeply entwined with other social categories, like race gender class Sexual Orientation. We also discussed how ableism prejudice against disability maybe even described as a preference for able bodiness how ableism is deeply implied with racism with sexism with classism with other systems of an inequality. In fact in our class we discussed how disability often lays at the root of these other forms of prejudice. So for example, many white americans and the antebellum period viewed black people as physically and intellectually incapable of citizenship. White antebellum americans viewed black people as essentially disabled and they use this to justify their political social economic inequality. By noticing these intersections between disability raised class gender Sexual Orientation other forms of oppression. We realize that combating combating ableism requires also comedic combating sexism racism and other forms of oppression. So from this really rich and complicated understanding of ability and disability. We move to the study of American History and we brought these ideas to this study. A few weeks ago. We began at the moment of contact between native peoples and european colonists and we moved chronologically right up to the American Revolution where our class will begin today. In our class before spring break i asked you to think about some of the most important takeaways from your study of disability in colonial america. So i said what conclusions can we draw about disability during the colonial period heres what you said. This is from isabel in colonial america. We saw instances of ableism that served as the foundation of societys current understanding and association of those with disabilities. At the same time. We also saw exception stabilism and ways that ablebodied people and those with disabilities easily lived and harmony through a modicum of accommodation without fear of isolation and discrimination. And from grace disability in the colonial period was determined on ones ability to work. Physical differences alone didnt make someone disabled as the often dangerous colonial lifestyle meant that work accidents or illness left. Most people impaired at some point in their lives. So long as someone was able to provide for themselves, they werent disabled. Okay. So today we are going to move on to talk about disability in the early United States. As you well know on july 4th, 1776 13 american colonies ratify the declaration of independence officially severing their political ties to Great Britain by that Point Military battles were already underway. So the first shot to the revolutionary war were fired and lexington and concord and april 7 to 75 the battle of bunker hill a patriot victory was thought a few months later. So in the declaration of independence Thomas Jefferson wrote the famous words, we hold these truths to be selfevident that all men are created equal that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights that among these are life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In our class today, were going to think about how this original and most fundamental statement of rights came true for disabled americans in the decades after the revolution. So word disabled people able to access these basic ideals of freedom and equality. Were they able to reap the promises of life liberty and the pursuit of happiness . And importantly, you know, how did gender race in class change the equation so were some disabled people able to access these rights and not others. We will also importantly consider how disabled people. Faced with legal political and social barriers how they fought back and fought for greater equality and opportunity. Okay, so in my lecture today, im going to try to convince you of two main points. These are powerful statements and they are challenging statements. And today. Im going to marshal evidence in their support. So the first statement is this. Our nation is rooted in ableism. In the early United States disability served as a rationale for exclusion from the privileges and obligations of citizenship. So a reminder weve talked about a variety of different definitions of ableism in our class, but for our purposes today ableism is the discrimination of and prejudice against people with disabilities. And i said, im going to suggest that this is our nation is rooted in this discrimination and prejudice. My second big claim today is that our nation is rooted in disability rights activism. In the early United States disabled americans challenged these restrictions and they fought for their rights as citizens. Okay, so lets go on to the first the first claim here. Lets start with how ableism shaped the founding of our nation. And to demonstrate this id like to focus on Early National law. This is a context where we can really clearly see ableism at work. The first thing to know when looking at american law after the revolution is that it was deeply rooted in the english legal tradition. So the revolution didnt occasion a wholesale rejection of English Common law instead. It was only over the course of the Early National period that juris began to emphasize the difference between english and american law and that they began to use the law in new ways. So we have this english foundation. Lets look first at the Legal Definition of disability in the Early National period this is the Legal Definition that americans inherited from english law as a comparison today the Legal Definition of disability would we might look to the ada the americans with disabilities act, but what was the Legal Definition of disability in early america . And here is the clearest one that i have found. And it is from michael daltons the country justice which was First Published in 1618 and this according from the 1746 edition. Dalton was an english juris and he wrote this this text which was widely circulated in the colonies and then the new republic it was probably the most popular legal text in the colonies. And heres what dalton says he gives us two definitions of disability. So first he talks about the person naturally disabled either in which or a member as an idiot lunatic blind lame etc not being able to work. His second definition is the person casually disabled or named in his body as the soldier or labor etc maimed in their lawful colonies. Okay a couple things to notice about these definitions. Maybe the first thing youve noticed is that dalton is not using words that we consider appropriate anymore. Right . Hes using words that are offensive today. I will let you know that idiot and lunatic these two words had particularly legal meanings and early america, but really you might have first noticed that the words hes using our derogatory. Second you might notice that dalton is identifying a distinction based on when the persons impairment occurred. So he deferentiates naturally disabled people those who have impairments from birth from what he calls casually disabled people people who have acquired impairments. This distinction is important for dalton because it determines how judges it officials apply exemptions based on disability or apply exclusions or restrictions based on disability. These might be applied intermittently temporarily permanently based on an individuals condition. And the third thing you might notice about daltons definitions. Is that what you knights naturally and casually disabled people is their inability to work. And grace in her statement already alerted to that to us to this in the colonial period but as we discussed in incapacity for socially expected labor was the most widely used definition of disability in the colonies and then also in the new republic so disability in the colonies and the Early National period disabled people were those who had physical and intellectual impairments that compromised their ability to labor in the ways that were expected of that. And you might already be thinking about how this would mean Something Different right the labor with that it was expected of different types of people. This would have meant different standards, right . So a different standard for a wealthy white man as opposed to a poor white man a free black woman as opposed to an enslaved black woman, right so labor meant Something Different based on social Political Economic expectations. Okay, so i think i might pause for a moment for questions. I dont know if anyone wants to put something in the chat. They have any questions so far. Oh, wait, just a minute or so. Yeah, thats a great question. Meg is asking what dalton meant by lawful callings. This is a great question. So he he means the mode of employment right there occupation, right . So and he may have referred to guild work, right which is work that your family kind of is is part of trade work over over many generations, but really, i think he just means that the employment that was expected at this person, but excellent question. Okay, great. So, lets move on and lets bring this this definition daltons definitions to a study of Early National law. Okay, were gonna move on. So so again my goal and my windows perfect. Okay, so remember one of my goals today is to suggest that disability served as a rationale for the exclusions. Sorry rationale for exclusion from the privileges and obligations of citizenship, right so that theres this ableism that is rooted in our Early National law. But what do i mean by the privileges and obligations of citizenship . You know, why do i use those words . Well, we dont think about this too often in our everyday lives but citizenship actually entails both duties that we have to the state and protections or rights that we receive from the stage. So for example our right to trial by jury is linked to our obligation to serve fundraise. Are right to enjoy protection in our defense is connected to our obligation to serve in the military or to bear arms in the nations defense. Citizenship involves both duties or obligations that we owe to the state as well as rights and privileges that we receive from the state. In the early United States disabled people were excluded from both. Or maybe more clearly disability served as a justification for excluding people from both civic duties and rights. Okay, so, lets see how this actually worked. Here is an example of an immigration restriction in delaware in 1797. This act requires and im going to read from it any old persons infants maimed lunatic or any vagabond or vagrant persons who want to settle in the state. Theyre required to be examined by government offices officers who are to determine their capacity for labor. If these newcomers are found to be unable to labor. Or likely to become unable to labor in the future right likely to come to rely on state assistance. They are ordered to be sent back to where they came from unless they can pay a surety so a sum of money for their future support. Its important to know that immigration restrictions were not specific to delaware. So nearly all colonies and then states had similar restrictions. Some of them were established as early as the 17th century. As you think about this exclusion you might notice the importance of labor here to the distinction of disability and to the distinction of who could settle and who could not. You might also notice how the categories of age class and disability are entwined right . So disabled people were excluded just as were elderly people poor people and minors. Okay, heres a marriage restriction from massachusetts in 1824. According to this act courts can and really should annull marriages if one of the parties experienced idiot see or a sand insanity at the time of the contract so intellectual incapacity invalidated a marriage contract leading to its annulment. Again, massachusetts is not unique here marriage restrictions based on intellectual and capacity date all the way back to roman law and they were implemented in early modern england and nearly all american colonies and states. It will also note that theres a long history of marriage restrictions based on physical capacity capacity for sexual intercourse for both men and women and these were all so enforced in colonial and Early National law. Again, its important to think intersectionally. So this law doesnt mention it. But who else was excluded from marriage in the colonies . Miners men and women under the age of consent also enslaved people were prohibited from marriage, right . So were seeing the ways that disability to category disability can intersect with categories of race free slave status as well as age, so heres a voting exclusion from virginia and 1830 the amended constitution of virginia excluded people of unsound mind from voting. Again, virginia is not unique nearly all colonies and states excluded people deemed to be intellectually incompetent from suffrage important again to think intersectionally, right who else is excluded from voting in this constitution people of unsound mind are listed along with poppers. So people poor peop