gregoire ausgraben is invisibly disabled. disability. invalidité. handicap. Behinderung. Behinderte. handicapé.e. invalide. invalid. disabled. different. difference. diversity. diversité. Diversität. switzerland. i submitted to a “psychiatric evaluation/expertise” recently per order of the disability insurance that is considering my application for support. this insurance defines disability in a combined medical-economic model. in short, one is deemed invalid when one is experiencing a loss of income due to professionally attested medical severe reasons that make working “normally” impossible. example: you are on social assistance. you suffer barriers from disability and you have no income. you can’t show a loss of income. result: you do not qualify. i have not written a novel up until here, but there are already a few alarming spots. i assume you see them. for comparison, other disability support systems define disability in a mixed medical-social model. one can be deemed disabled when one is in a medically attested suffering situation and suffering barriers that make participating in the community difficult or impossible. participation in the community is not necessarily defined as work.
in a social model of disability (social definition of disability), disability is not in the disabled person, but between the disabled person and their context. "disabled" simply means "experiencing unjust barriers which are erected by the context because the majority of people functions differently and has the entitlement to define the standards". in other words, disability is rooted in the ableism of the majority. social definitions of disability are slowly getting understood and more popular.
when somebody "able" understands what a social definition of disability means, they can enter into a gestalt-experience. suddenly how disabled persons are considered in economic and medical definitions of disability appears terribly violent.
back to switzerland.
as i say that, my brain is dividing. my sensations get amplified or numbed depending on the area of the body. i start to dissociate again. my recently experienced “expertise” cut me in pieces. why?
first trial at explaining. i felt observed, dissected, questioned. it was not my body that was observed. the expert was not testing if my arm was still able to lift wood. my arm would. the expert was observing my mind, while this mind was trying all it could to be able to give answers to the questions. at the same time, this mind was experiencing the emotions that were generated by the questions and the submission to them. i was observed. i was not collaborating to develop a common vision of who i am and what i can do. the words became knives. the dissection was ongoing.
my mind the observing mind of the expert layer 1 my mind knows it is observed layer 2 my mind would like to collaborate on creating a common vision of who i am and what i do, but it has to submit to observation primarily layer 3 my mind receives the questions layer 4 my mind works at true answers layer 5 my mind receives information from the emotional journey that the questions generate layer 6 my mind experiences other stimuli from the cold in the room, hunger, thirst, tiredness, mental fatigue, stress layer 7 my mind has to sort out what is coming in layer 8 my mind can leave and rest layer 9 my mind dissociates layer 10 my mind sends a page of extra thoughts to the expert
36 days later. i receive a letter from the disability insurance. the expert's report is not in the envelope, but what transpires is that he saw me enough and took me seriously. i am relieved. it is only just and fair, but i feel immensely lucky as i have knowledge of many other persons in cases similar to mine who have had to go unseen for years.
