Judy Pamer – 9/10/08

This page was last updated on September 14, 2008.

Disability does not define the child; Judy Pamer; Beaver County Times; September 10, 2008.

A few previous letters from Ms. Pamer are here, here, and here.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.

“Recent media statements have commended Sarah Palin’s decision to have her baby even though he was diagnosed with Down syndrome prior to birth.”

[RWC] This is a letter from an Obama supporter who is trying to pick at Gov. Palin.

“As the mother of a son who has Down syndrome, I object. Suggesting that a decision needed to be made as to whether this child had a right to life based on a diagnosis of Down syndrome is barbaric. If Palin is truly pro-life, then there should have been no decision. Birth would have been assumed at conception regardless.”

[RWC] By all reports, Gov. Palin and her husband never considered not having the child.

“In her convention speech, Palin commented that she would be a champion for children who have ‘special needs.’ By identifying her son as a ‘special needs’ child, she is giving him a label that will automatically set him apart rather than include him.”

[RWC] Had I not read Ms. Pamer’s previous letters, I might have thought her objection wasn’t politically motivated. Here’s the other problem. Since 2004, there have been at least 20 editorials, letters to the editor, and other pieces published in the Times that referred to “special needs” children. Ms. Pamer wrote several letters during this time and, as best as I can tell, she wrote none to object to the term “special needs.”

“My son has no special needs. His needs are perfectly normal for him.

“My son is not a Down syndrome child; he is a child who has Down syndrome. His disability is something he has, not what he is. It does not define him.”

[RWC] Isn’t identifying her child as a son label him? Shouldn’t Ms. Pamer refer to her son as a child who has male chromosomes? Does a child’s sex “define him?”

Following the logic of the previous paragraph, Ms. Pamer’s son doesn’t have a disability. His abilities “are perfectly normal for him.” By “identifying her son as a” child with a disability, isn’t Ms. Pamer “giving him a label that will automatically set him apart rather than include him?”

In the PC world, isn’t using the term “disability” a no-no?

“I am pleased that Palin and her son Trigg have brought the struggles and the issues that face children who have Down syndrome to the forefront.”

[RWC] No she isn’t. You see, leftists want us to believe Republicans are rich people with perfect children. It’s a lot harder to demonize a normal “middle class” family that faces the same challenges as the rest of us.

“I am not pleased with the methods she and those surrounding her are using to communicate these issues.”

[RWC] Given that Ms. Pamer apparently hasn’t publicly objected before, does anyone believe we’d have seen this letter if Mr. Obama in the same situation would have used exactly the same words?

“I hope that as she becomes more immersed in being the mother of a child who has Down syndrome she will become more informed.”

[RWC] Ah, since Ms. Pamer allegedly doesn’t use the same terminology as Gov. Palin, Gov. Palin is ignorant. FYI, Trigg Palin is not the first special needs child in the greater Palin family.