Assume that you havent spent your spring break 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 we have discussed in our class so far. Then i will lecture 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 able is shaped Early National law, and how some disabled people push back and fought for greater access and equality. Okay, so for our review, our class began by thinking really complexity about the meeting and experience of disability. So, we discussed two 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, hey lynn difference, a visual limitation, this is seen as their disability. In the logic of the medical model, disabilities are 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 disabilities 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 mainstream society, right, that the experience these physical, political, social, attitudinal barriers to equality. So, according to the social model, the negative effects of these socially constructed limitations far outweigh the negative effects of any physical, intellectual impairment. As a result, the social model is focus on fixing able isnt, fixing prejudice and discrimination in society, not 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 viewed disability as an individual problem. We thought the social model was a lot better, but that there were still some drawbacks. And that this primary drawback was rooted to the social models glossing over, or maybe even a denial of the real physical, intellectual, sensory, mobility limitations that people do experience. Many of you pointed out that not all disabilities can be alleviated through social change. Others, if some disable people that want to have their bodies fix, right . They want to have their pain alleviated and this is okay. So as a class, we decided that combating a prejudice and discrimination does not have to mean a rejection of medicine. So, many of us in our class settled on taupe and seabreeze theory of complex embodiment as maybe perfect medium between the medical and social models of disability. 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, argues that separating the disability 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. Many of you were quick to realize that a preference for ability, a strong desire for health and capacity, a celebration of ablebodied needs and able minded miss, this pervades our lives. We are constantly encouraged to be as smart, as healthy as we can be. Friends and family members are celebrated when they overcome or persevere pass their disability. And in our own university, we see perfection and achievement valorized. The preference for ablebodied miss enable bidens is really but in our class, we attempted to question this 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 we rent authors who pushed back and resisted this impulse to prioritize ability in their lives. And thinking about ability and disability, we also always endeavor to think intersectional, right. So we discussed how the category disability is deeply entwined with other social categories like race, gender, class, sexual orientation. We also discussed how ableism, prejudice against disability, may be even described as a preference for ablebodiedness, how ableism is deeply entwined with racism, with sexism, with classes, with other systems of 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 in the antebellum period viewed black people as physically and intellectually incapable of citizenship. Right . Antebellum americans viewed black people as, essentially, disabled. And they used this to justify their political, social, economic and equality. By noticing these intersections between disability, race, class and gender, sexual orientation, other forms of oppression, we realize that combating ableism requires also combatting 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 that study. A few weeks ago we began at the level of contact between native peoples and european colonists and we used 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 exceptions to ableism and ways that able bodied people and those with disabilities easily lived in harmony thrrough 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 ratified the declaration of independence, officially severing their political ties to great britain. By that Point Military battles were already underway. So the first shots of the revolutionary were were fired in lexington and concord, in april, 1775. The battle of bunker hill, a patriot victory, was fought a few months later. So in the declaration of independence, Thomas Jefferson wrote the famous words we hold these truths to be self evident, 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, we are 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 were 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 and 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 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 did 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 jurists 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 a. D. A. 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 is going from the 1746 addition dalton was an english jurist and he wrote this text which was widely circulated in the colonies and then the new republic and it was probably the most popular legal text in the colonies and here is what dalton says. He gives us two definitions of disability. The first he talks about, the person naturally disabled, either in wit or member, as an idiot, lunatic, blind, lame et cetera, not being able to work. His second definition is, the person casually disabled, or maimed in his body, as the soldier or laborer et cetera maimed in their lawful callings. Okay. A couple of 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 have particular legal meanings in early america, but really, you might have first noticed that the ones you see are derogatory. Second, you might notice that dalton has identified a distinction based on when the persons impairment occur. So he differentiates naturally disabled people, those who have impairments from birth, from what he calls casually disabled people, people who have acquired impairments. This important distinction is important for dalton because it determines how judges and officials apply exemptions based on disability or apply exclusions or restrictions based on disability. This might be applied intermittently, temporarily, permanently, based on an individuals condition. And the third thing you might notice about daltons definition definitions is that what unites naturally and casually disabled people is their inability to work. And grace, in her statement, already alerted us to this in the colonial period. But as we discussed, an incapacity for socially accepted 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 have physical and intellectual impairments that compromised their ability to labor in the ways that were expectged of them. And you might already be thinking about how this would mean Something Different, like the labor that 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 new 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 if, you have any questions so far . Maybe 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 means the mode of employment, like their occupation, right . So, and he may have referred to guild work, right, which is work that your family, kind of, is part of, trade work over many generations. But really i think he just means the employment that was expected of this president. An excellent question. Okay, great. So lets move on. And lets bring this definition, daltons definitions to a study of Early National law. Okay. Im going to move on. So again, my goal move this around to second, okay, great, move it around, 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 receiv from the state. So for example, our right to trial by jury is linked to our obligation to serve on juries. Our 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 receiv from the state. In the early united states, disabled people were excluded from both. Or, more clearly, disability served as a justification for excluding people from both civic duties and rights. So, lets see how this actually worked. Here is an 1797. This act requires example of an immigration, i will read from it, any old persons, infants, maimed, lunatic, or any vagabond or vagrants persons who want to settle in the state, they are required to be examined by government 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 suretys, 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. So, disabled people were excluded, just as were elderly people, for people, and miners. Here is a marriage restriction. Massachusetts in 1824. According to this act, courts can and really should annul marriages if one of the parties experience idiocy or 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 incapacity 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 there is a long history of marriage restrictions based on physical capacity. Capacity for sexual intercourse, for both men and women. These were also enforced in colonial and Early National law. Again, its important to think intersectional. 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 in slaved people were prohibited from marriage. So, we are seeing the way that disability, the category of disability, can intersect with categories of free slave status, as well as age, and race. Here of is a voting exclusion from virginia in 1803. 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 intersectional, right . Who else is excluded from voting in this constitution . People of unsound mind are listed along with paupers, so poor people who are receiving state aid as well as soldiers and people convicted of crimes. And on stated exclusion here, the constitution does not mention it, but women also are excluded from the vote, as our black, indigenous, and enslaved people. As well as minors, right . So, large numbers of people excluded, including those of unsound mind. Again, here is a military exclusion based on disability and this one is from the Continental Congress in 1776. So, colonial and state as well as the Continental Army excluded disabled people from service. So this order requires recruited officers to be careful to enlist none but healthy, sound, and able bodied men, and not under 16 years of age. In addition, women and free and enslaved black men were excluded from the army or the Continental Army and the latter until washington was persuaded to attract their formal exception a few years later because of dire military consequences. But race, gender, and disability all our rationales for exclusion from the army. And guardianship. So, you may be a little bit familiar with guardianship based on Britney Spears is recent court case. But basically, guardianship is a total loss of legal, Political Economic rights because of intellectual capacity. Incapacity. So, in early placel america, people with intellectual as well as physical incapacities actually as well we are also placed under guardianship. Not all of them, but some, somewhere place under guardianship if their family members or other Community Members requested it. So, this act is from North Carolina in 1836. Those described as lunatics or idiots were assigned legal guardians who manage their legal, political, financial affairs. People under guardianship have almost no legal rights outside their ability to contest there guardianship. And then this is actually quite debated in the Early National period of whether you could contest to be released from guardianship. Again, guardianship is not limited to North Carolina. It was also not limited to those deemed to be intellectually or physically incapable. Miners were under the guardianship of their parents, their caregivers married women and in the Early National period of united states, especially in the south, free black men and women were legally required to have white male guardians. So, guardianship, again, extends beyond disability to include age, gender, and race. These are just a few of the restrictions and exclusions that disabled people face in the decades after the revolution. Other restrictions include settlement, settlement in a town, being able to testify, in court, being able to see, hold public office, your ability to pay taxes, for enslaved people, also the ability to be rested on their capacity. I cant cover all those now. But the last one i do want to talk about is confinement. So, all of the restrictions that ive described to you so far were actually also enacted in early modern england and the american colonies. These were all restrictions already in place of that in the American Revolution and that Early National americans simply continued. However, in the decades after the revolution, some of these exclusions based on disability also intensified. You read about this in your reading for today. But our nation is a republic, which means that it relies on citizens being able to make reasoned political decisions. It also relies on the physical labor of inhabitants to make the nation productive, economically viable. As a result, in the Early National period, disability and disabled people became intensely threatening. These were people whose bodies and mind seemed, fundamentally unfit for citizenship, right . The fact that disabled people could not work, in the language of the law, seemed to threaten the entire national experiment. So in the years after the revolution, disability became especially threatening, resulting in the tightening of restrictions. Excuse me. So, this tightenings most clearly seen in the institutionalize disabled people. The actors seen on the righthand side of your screen is from massachusetts in 1797. It orders lunatic people and those so curiously mad a surrender them dangerous, as peace and safety of the good people to be confined in county jails and homes houses. So many people were confined in the next few decades that the state established a lunatic hospital in 1830, 1836. There was kind of so many people here that the state orders idiot and lunatic or inseam persons, including those who are not furiously mad, to the institution. So these latter individuals did not threaten harm in any way, but they, again, alongside those furiously mad previously, they were all required to report west are. Again, massachusetts is not unique here. So, nearly all states established a sounds and institution in the mid 19th century. Institute other institutions were established to. Schools and asylums for those described as blind, deaf and dumb, as well as those with individual impairments were established. Also institutions for people convicted of crimes, right . More prisons were built, as well as more owns houses. For those who are poor or received state aid. And we are going to talk more on thursday in this class about this impulse, this Institution Building impulse in the Early National period and this desire to fix or treat disability, in conjunction with other seeming social problems. Okay, i might pause just for one minute or two for some more questions. I dont know if anyone has anything burning here. Okay, great. Lets keep going then. So, the final part of my lecture today is focused on how disabled people so remember, our nation is rooted in april is a, but i also suggests that it is rooted disability by its anna argue that in the early united states, disabled americans challenge the restrictions they face and fought for their rights as citizens. So, disabled people fought back against all the different exclusions that i outlined before, and more, right . So, they contested immigration, marriage, and voting restrictions. They lied or simply ignored military exclusions, and many physically resisted confinement. So, in a whole host of ways, people challenged restrictions based on disability and advocated for their lives as citizens. Today, i want to show you how this worked in one small case. In one Small Community. So this is just one individual person and her story of resistance. So, meet lydia hoopes. We really dont know too much about her life. We think that she was born in 1785, and we do know that she lived in east bradford, pennsylvania. In 1810, the population of east bradford was about 1000 people. So this is a really small, tightknit community. In 1814, obiah, who is lydias brother, moves to place her under guardianship for intellectual incapacity and you will see on this screen his petition for guardianship. And im going to read you a bit of what he writes. So, he writes at the judge of the court of the common pleas and says, for the space of three years past, lydia has been deprived of the exercise of her rational faculties and understanding, so as to be altogether incapable of governing and protecting herself or managing her affairs. Obiah went on to give a few examples on lydias inability. He says, she frequently discourses in a wild incoherent manner but alarming her friends without cause and denying that her are such. And that the house she now lives in is not the house she was born in, although it is a fact. As she was born in the house that you now visit i. He also suggests that she frequently tears and destroys your clothes without cause. But after this initial assessment of her incapacities, the court orders and inquisition to evaluate her ability. The local sheriff summons 17, when he describes as good and lawful men to evaluate her abilities. These men meet with lidia. We dont know exactly where. Maybe her house, maybe a local tavern, or in. They ask her a bunch of questions. They ask are, we dont know exactly when they asked her, but it could be about her names of family members, the neighbors, it might have been about her property the land that she owned the, money that she owns. They mightve asked her to complete simple tasks, like counting to ten, writing her own name. The man soon found lidia to be of unsound mind. And so the court placed her under the guardianship of her brother, abiah but. Under guardianship, lydia lost all her legal Political Economic rights as a single woman. She couldnt use the money she had. By property, may contracts to testify in court. She really lost some of the most basic rights of citizenship. In fact, one of the only writes that she did retain as her ability to contest or guardianship. And so she did. In 1824, lydia sent a petition to the court of common police, asking to be released from guardianship. In her letter to the court, she argued that she was now restored to her recent unsoundness of mike, and she attached three different testimonials from neighbors and touch people, and these people confirmed that lydia was completely and firmly in her senses, that she was as capable of taking care of her person and state as she ever was, that was someone writing. So the court launched a major investigation. They heard testimony from at least 24 men and women in the Small Community of east bradford. These men and women came to court and testified about lydias abilities. Their testimonies were extraordinarily detailed. They were called they recalled past interactions with lydia, their observations offer before, during her guardianship. Hes testimonials, they describe her closing, her conduct, her conversation, her manners and always, you know, the perceptions of her ability to manage yourself and manage the money and the land that she owns. Residents were very divided on her case. So some argued that she should be released from guardianship so i have one example from Amos Worthington im just going to read it to you. Her contact and conversation has been much the same as any other person in the ordinary walks of life. So much so that if he this is a must have not heard that she was oneself on some point, he should not support that she ever was. Other residents wear a little bit less favorable, right . So they suggested that the diaz mind still continue to be weak or not right. Mary canard, for instance, can explain that lydias whole conversation appeared alike and travel, totally different from what it was when i first knew her. Her conversation was not that of a rational person, canard concluded. So after this detailed investigation the court decided that olivia was still of an side mind and they decided that she was unfit for independence. And so she purchased and again. Two years later she writes a second letter to the court of common case please. And this letter is quite amazing. She described herself as a grievously vexed and disquieted. She argued that at the time at the said time of taking said inquisition, she was not of an soundbite. So she disagreed with the original inquisition finding. She argued that she never was im quoting here before or after taking the set inquisition, nor is she now, by reason of any unsoundness of mind, incapable of managing herself and her estate. She is capable of the governance off herself, she declared. And this time the Court Approved her request. We dont know what made them change their mind. The court filed it doesnt contain any new testimonials from people or relatives, but lydia obtained released from guardianship as well as greater legal, political and economic freedom. So ive concluded our lecture today with lydias case because i really think it exemplifies those two big points that i wanted to share with you today. First, our nation is rooted in ableism, right . In the early united states, olympic disability served as a rationale for exclusion from the privileges and obligations of citizenship. And finally, our nation is rooted in disability rights activists. In addition to ableism, we have this history of disability rights activism. In the early united states, disabled americans challenged these restrictions and fought for their rights as citizens. Okay, ill stop here, again, for any other questions if, you want to put them in the chat. And no pressure yeah, so make is asking, where god is usually family members . They were. They could also be members of the town. So sometimes Community Members, say, like local officials, would place them under guardianship. But primarily guardians where family members or close friends, neighbors. Absolutely. Great question. Okay, great well, thank you so much, everybody. Excellent job today. And i will see back your on thursday. Thanks again swept through the colonies. Weve been talking about the founding of the american colonies, and were getting now into the 1700s. Today and this week i want to focus mostly weve been