Customer Stories
Short introductory copy here. Approximately twenty words would suffice. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod.
Avoiding Problematic Sentiments and Comments in Conversations Around PMAs
With recent incidents involving personal mobility aids (PMAs) hitting the news, as well as the accompanying online and public conversations, we at DPA would like to reiterate comments we have made previously about the need for conversations around PMAs to be respectful and inclusive of the diversity of disabled PMA users.
Recent Incidents and Public Conversations
One of the recent incidents was of a video which went viral earlier this month. In it, a man wearing a hoodie of a food delivery company alighted from his PMA, walked to the food outlet briskly, and collected a food order. He then secured it at the back of his PMA, before riding off on it through the shopping centre.
Netizens were outraged by the video – with many calling it an example of abusing the use of PMAs in public spaces, with some demanding more regulations regarding its usage.
These sentiments are not confined to just the netizen crowd. Everyday Singaporeans, members of the press, and even members of Parliament (MPs) have cited similar incidents as evidence of the need for stricter regulations, and many using phrases such as “people who look young and able-bodied” and” “young people with no visible disabilities or health issues” to describe perceived misusers of PMAs.
When asked to elaborate why they feel an individual is a misuser of a PMA, most would comment that they have seen “seemingly able-bodied individuals” “navigating with ease”, “travelling quickly”, or “travelling with small children” on their PMAs.
However, as we have highlighted in the past, such comments and characterisations of perceived PMA misusers, while potentially made with no poor intention, are concerning and even harmful to the disability community.
No one way or age to “look disabled”
Many persons with disabilities use PMAs – be it motorised wheelchairs or scooters – to get around daily. It is important to emphasise that disabled PMA users rely on and operate their PMAs differently. Some disabled PMA users rely on their PMAs 24/7, while others may still be able to walk, and even walk fast, for short distances, but may need to rely on PMAs for longer distances. Disabled PMA users often operate their PMA at different speeds – depending on a range of factors including one’s disability, personal preference, and safety of environment. Some disabled PMA users are also food delivery personnel, and their PMAs enable them to earn a living.
Additionally, the assumption that someone is misusing a PMA because they can “navigate with ease” or “travel quickly” on their PMA through a crowd or any other setting is not only inaccurate, but also completely misses the point of using them. For many disabled PMA users, their PMAs are their lifeline in order to travel with ease from point to point – provided that the location is PMA-accessible. Moreover, it is simply wrong to assume that someone is abusing the use of PMAs solely because they have a child with them. Some disabled PMA users also happen to be parents or grandparents, and assuming otherwise promotes the already harmful stereotype that disabled people do not have children.
Lastly, it should go without saying that disability can be found across all age groups, and may not always be visible. While the prevalence of disability tends to be higher amongst the elderly, there also exists younger individuals whose disabilities require the use of PMAs.
Thus, comments which imply or outrightly categorise PMA users solely as elderly and/or not “seemingly able-bodied” are not only inaccurate, but they also promote harmful stereotypes. These could then potentially lead to policy implementation which disregards, excludes, or even harms the everyday realities of persons with disabilities.
Need for caution in regulations around PMAs
As announced in December, the government is currently rolling out new regulations around the use of PMAs. Such regulations include the need for PMAs to travel no more than 6 km/hr (down from the current 10 km/hr), and the need for PMA users to be used only by individuals with “certified walking difficulties”.
DPA has received mixed feedback about the regulations. However, we have expressed the need for such regulations to be implemented with great caution, and would like to take this opportunity in light of recent news about PMAs to reiterate our comments for the need for such caution.
For example, the government has noted that 6 km/hr is equivalent to a brisk walk and hence there is no need for a faster speed. However, this will be akin to banning individuals from running or even jogging on footpaths in Singapore. As noted, disabled PMA users use their PMAs for a variety of reasons including to earn a living as food delivery personnel. Some disabled food delivery personnel who use PMAs have expressed concern and strong disagreement with the 6 km/hr limit and are worried that the new regulations will inevitably hurt earnings. The implementation of the regulations needs to take into consideration such important concerns.
Secondly, it is currently unclear what “certified walking difficulties” will encompass. The government has said that they want to implement the new regulations so that disabled PMA users will still have ease in using their PMAs. However, to achieve this, the definition of what is “certified” will need to be broad to include various disabilities or conditions that result in even mild walking difficulties.
Thirdly, if the conversations in the news, online, or by public officials is to continue in the problematic manner that it has been, we at DPA are greatly concerned about how such regulations will be enforced, and if the perpetuation of negative stereotypes as outlined above will lead to individuals with various types of disabilities being reluctant to use their PMAs – leading to greater inaccessibility for persons with disabilities.
—
DPA will have a longer statement to come where we outline in more specifics our recommendations on the implementation of the new regulations. for now, we urgently call on the general public, including on news media and public officials, to avoid such afore-mentioned characterisations to minimise or avoid the perpetuation of harmful stereotypes.
