Being confined to a wheelchair is clearly inferior to not being confined, but it does not force someone to be consistently unhappy. You can be happy without going to school, but that's no reason to deny someone the ability to go to school.happiness is subjective. but being confined to a wheelchair, often not being able to move a good portion of your body is not being happy. plus you can be happy without going to school.
Exactly. How many children in each school can be considered "severely mentally disabled"; so much so that they cannot fend for themselves? In my experiences at school there were maybe 2 or 3 of such kids so it wouldn't take a lot of effort to go through these cases to see who was really benefiting from an education.But each case needs to be examined individually, I don't think there's a precise definition as to when someone will be productive or not productive, but it's better to air on the optimistic side. But for some extremely retarded people, it may not be worth it to send them through 12+ years of school.
I would rather die than live with severely reduced cognitive ability.I'd like to turn this argument around. However unlikely this is, the OP could have a stroke/other brain related injury and be turned into, for all intents and purposes, a vegetable. How would you like it if all opporunities for you to be given a happy/meaningful shot at further life were just cut off, and you were thrown to the side as worthless. This is effectively what you're doing, as school, while it doesn't function in the same way for handicapped persons as it does for me or you, is the only practical way of making these people's lives worth living.
Are they? Do you consider being of the species Homo Sapien to be the only thing necessary to be a person?[21:54] <jumpluff> the mentality is "Well they are still people too",
I just wanted to address this post. ADD is not a learning disability. I have it and I get straight A's. I don't struggle to pick up material whatsoever. It is a trying disability to be honest, since it tends to make you procrastinate and now have the will to pay attention. A learning disability is something that intellectual impairs you, ADD does nothing of the sort.ADD/ADHD and Dislexia are the flag-boys of this, especially border-line cases where students are otherwise completely normal energetic children outside the fact that the structured classroom itself is a nightmare for them. Obviously depending on severity, a specialized school with greater patience and flexibility in the classroom would be ideal-- but many parents cannot afford the prices to send their kids to such schools.
Everything you said (except the word 'human') can be applied to animals (e.g. monkeys), and I've never heard of anyone requesting that monkeys should be taught in schools. School would almost certainly benefit the monkey more, anyway.All I really gather from your original post is that you are selfish. You made a vague statement regarding people with severe mental handicaps and turned it around to a "how can this be changed to benefit me?". You might be too blind to see it, but these same "severely handicapped" people you refer to provide an excellent service to our society. Want to know what that service is? Faith and hope. These people are a symbol for all of us "normal" people. They make us realize how lucky we are to have the many blessings we enjoy, and they give us immense knowledge on genetics, medical science, etc. Aside from all that, they are living proof of the true strength of human will, and the ability to accomplish even the most improbable feats with enough determination and time.
Why shouldn't we teach them? Their lives are no less valuable than our own (to say otherwise would be heartless), so we must show compassion and patience and allow them the same rights we have.
That's your decision to make for yourself. But not to impose on others.I would rather die than live with severely reduced cognitive ability.
Not that you are disagreeing with me, but I will point out that I said that people with ADD are often brilliant-- and become wildly successful should they be able to overcome their "disability."I just wanted to address this post. ADD is not a learning disability. I have it and I get straight A's. I don't struggle to pick up material whatsoever. It is a trying disability to be honest, since it tends to make you procrastinate and now have the will to pay attention. A learning disability is something that intellectual impairs you, ADD does nothing of the sort.
I don't think that they are overall any more likely to be brilliant or wildly successful than the average person.Not that you are disagreeing with me, but I will point out that I said that people with ADD are often brilliant-- and become wildly successful should they be able to overcome their "disability."
Their lives are worth less. There are plenty of ways to sensibly define worth that show this is true. The only way it is untrue would be if you define it solely as "being alive". If it is money made and spent, if it is people impacted, if it is being able to fend for themselves and not be reliant on others, if it is influencing/forming/helping other people's opinions and reasoning skills, et cetera, severely incapacitated people are going to come out behind.Their lives are no less valuable than our own (to say otherwise would be heartless), so we must show compassion and patience and allow them the same rights we have.
Keep in mind that we've seen many examples of people who were considered to be beyond teaching that ended up benefitting from learning and led better lives for it. The Helen Keller example is a good one, as well as countless other stories we've heard of people who did the impossible.
link or something to these countless other stories
The simple fact is we have constantly been shown that our preconceived notions can be disproven, so we cannot say beyond a shadow of a doubt that any one person is completely "worthless" and incapable of learning or functioning in any way.
yes, we can. if they cannot function in society and just be there to be there, then what exactly are they doing? hope? hope can be derived from a number of sources. i wouldn't say that handicapped children = hope.
Generally, if a severely handicapped person is well enough to be able to travel to school (albeit with help) and be there for an extended period of time, then they are in some way capable of learning material. If a person is a complete vegetable and cannot possibly function, then chances are they wouldn't be able to even make the trip to school in the first place.
people who live in wheelchairs, are wheeled onto special buses, stayed with on the bus, taken off the bus, and wheeled to class, wheeled onto the bus at the end of the day, wheeled home, and continue to be taken care of at home can make the trip, but how is the knowledge helping them?
Now, I'm not a scientist, so I won't act like I know for sure. But it seems to me that, because we've seen so many of these "against all odds" success stories, we don't really have a 100% accurate method of determining a person's receptivity (is that a word?) to knowledge and learning. Therefore, if we still cannot scientifically PROVE that a person, beyond any shred of doubt, is fully incapable of learning a single thing, how can we go as far as to stop educating them?
because if you are only capable of learning simple things that will not be used in your life, why are we using our resources to teach you?
It is pretty clear that the severely mentally disabled are not capable of learning very much. If our policy was to try to educate everything that cannot be undeniably proven to be unteachable we would be letting animals go to school.Now, I'm not a scientist, so I won't act like I know for sure. But it seems to me that, because we've seen so many of these "against all odds" success stories, we don't really have a 100% accurate method of determining a person's receptivity (is that a word?) to knowledge and learning. Therefore, if we still cannot scientifically PROVE that a person, beyond any shred of doubt, is fully incapable of learning a single thing, how can we go as far as to stop educating them?
Your policy isn't to educate everything that cannot be undeniably proven to be unteachable. Your policy is to teach American children. Their parents paid the taxes just as yours did. You have absolutely no right to filter them out of public schools.It is pretty clear that the severely mentally disabled are not capable of learning very much. If our policy was to try to educate everything that cannot be undeniably proven to be unteachable we would be letting animals go to school.
Can you link to any "against all odds" stories that involve mental retardation. Stories like Helen Keller are a different issue as the people in those stories still had normal intelligence.
I understand that, I was replying to waterbomb's point that we cannot 100% prove that retarded humans can't learn. I know that our current policy is to try to educate all children, but I do not think that it is a good policy. Why should we spend resources to try to educate someone who is not going to be very receptive to learning.Your policy isn't to educate everything that cannot be undeniably proven to be unteachable. Your policy is to teach American children. Their parents paid the taxes just as yours did. You have absolutely no right to filter them out of public schools.
First off, I'm not playing devil's advocate, these are legitimately my views. We have certainly improved the treatment of mentally handicapped and have successfully trained some mildly affected individuals to have simple jobs and take care of themselves at least in part but I honestly have never heard of a severely mentally retarded individual ever making use their education.I'm too lazy to hunt up stories just to engage in a futile argument with a couple of people who are unwilling to listen anyway, and really are only posting in this topic to illicit negative reactions. I don't have to link you to a specific story for you to know that we've made significant advancements in the study and education of the mentally handicapped.
It took me til now to realize that the OP (and those agreeing with him) are simply playing Devil's Advocate for sport, and enjoy pretending to be heartless douches to see the responses and attention they get. Guarantee none of you would have the balls to express this opinion to people in real life.
Hitler also breathed air for the entirety of his life.Hitler went after the disabled first. Think about that when you say that someone with a disability will be a drain on society.
It's not an emotion argument. It's an observation of what actions have been taken in the past by a government, justified by the idea that certain people have a negative impact on society. (I would have been more correct to say "Nazi Germany" than "Hitler").You're just like Hitler!...It is better to use real points than try to use cheap "emotion" arguments.