And here I thought that the destructive sweep of anti-social policies undertaken by Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush were merely regressions into some time before FDR. How was I to know our esteemed Presidents were anticipating the close of the middle ages.
Consider this passage from `A History of Disability', Henri-Jacques Stiker, taken from the section, Social Ethics: When the Poor All Become Dangerous:
``...Two studies by Bronislaw Geremek, dealing with these questions of the marginalized, are dotted with allusions to the disabled. What can we learn from them? The true title of Truand et miserable (Crooks and Paupers) might be `Useless to the World, Crooks, ...' A whole operational perspective is summed up there! People on the margin have become useless. From useless to harmful is only a simple step. This step was taken by the legislations and judicial practice of the last quarter of the fifteenth century and the sixteenth century that `condemned anti-social behavior as a crime,' a crime that could be punished by forced labor. Here is a new notion: put the marginalized to work, rehabilitate them through labor. Of course, `the ill, lame, and infirm retained a right to alms' but `their children were put in apprenticeship or in service.' Behind the idea of work can be seen that of security: institutions and group interests will seek to respond to this need. Here too, a distinction was made between the abl-bodied and those not able, but an extreme one: `When they are not able-bodied and are incapable of work, they recover their social utility, their special place in the social division of labor in that they offer the rich the possibility of acting on their charitable feelings and thus win salvation. But they remain scorned, unworthy, and deprived of all respect' Under the presidency of Robert de Billy the Parliament of Rouen deliberated on the disorder created by poverty and criminality. The council was unanimous in stating `that it is necessary to distinguish and separate out the true poor, ill, feebleminded, and infirm from the vagabonds, petty thieves, and idle, all healthy and able-bodied. Here we find a distinction met a bit earlier. But it should be noted that in the course of these deliberations not all the notables were in agreement. The judgment was difficult to reach. The categories of imposture are myriad. People went so far as to form groups and disguised themselves as beggars, cripples, professional mourners, paralytics, blind persons. In addition, there were `sects' of beggars among which we find the Moscarini who were maimed, the Mandragoli, the crippled in carts, the blind Abbici, the leprous and ulcer-ridden Cratersanni. All of this is confused, mixed up: between the authentic and the false disabled the boundaries are not so simple. And these bands included, as well as the impaired just cited, converted Jews, pilgrims, street-singers.'' (85p)
For anyone who has dealt with the bizarre and labyrinthine detail of authentication and qualification for payment of a benefit under Medicare, Medicaid, and HMOs, the dilemma of the Parliament of Rouen is quite understandable. The Notables of Rouen were indeed the HCFA of their time.
I was so inspired by this passage, that I think I will hang large ornate signs with Mascarini, Mandragoli, Abbici, Cratersanni elaborately lettered in renaissance script so that people who come in to the shop will know where to wait for their appropriate authentication and service. Any Italian speakers out there in cyberland are invited to pass along other antique designations of a similar sort.
For any one interested in a cultural history of disability, this text is pretty good: A History of Disability, Henri-Jacques Stiker, trans Sayers W, Uni Mich Press, 1999.
(Note to Marta Russell. I went to see MLB and she loaned me the above along with Charlton, Longmore, Pelka, and Shapiro. She also had the Fleischer and Zames book.)
Chuck Grimes