Medición de potencia activa y potencia reactiva con instrumentos

This study has also drawn on the theory of biographical disruption, and this has been incorporated in the social model of disability to explore and understand the impact of a child’s disability on mothers. Biographical disruption was initially conceptualised by Bury (1982) to describe how an onset of a chronic illness is experienced as a biographical disruption in a person’s everyday structures and relationships. In his study that involved thirty participants that had been diagnosed with rheumatic arthritis, Bury (1982) argued that there are three aspects of disruption. Firstly, the breaching of common-sense boundaries, this is followed by a second stage that involves significant disruption to a person’s biography and self-concept. This phase is characterised by questions such as

‘why me?’ The third stage involves a person responding to disruption by either changing the situation or mobilising resources that can help build resilience (Larsson and Grassman, 2012, Reeve et al., 2010, Wilson, 2007). According to Bury (1982: 169) a chronic illness is ‘a major kind of disruptive experience […]

32

them are disrupted’. Recent proponents (Reeves et al., 2010, Wilson, 2007) of the theory of biographical disruption have argued that disruption of person’s biography can have an impact on how their self-identity, how they think they are viewed by others and their assumption about the future. Cayless et al. (2010) sum it up by stating that biographical disruption ‘can lead to social isolation and a sense of difference from contemporaries, culminating in a perceived failure to fit in or as ‘disrupted feelings of fit’ (Cayless et al., 2010:12).

The social model of disability and the theory of biographical disruption illuminate how a disability can be as disabling to the caregiver as the person with a disability. The long term disruptive effects can be such as uncertainty and loss of social identity which can be in the form of loss of social status (structural invisibility) or withdrawing from social activities (physical invisibility) (Morgan, 2012, Reid-Cunningham, 2009, Mahon-Daly and Andrews, 2002, Willet and Deegan, 2001). The concept of biographical disruption is closely connected to the concept of liminality.

Liminal describes the process of social change whereby a person is in a transitional form, that is neither in the old nor a new position within society. It is argued that in the liminal or suspended state, an individual cannot state their position exactly (Mahon-Daly and Andrews, 2002). For example, Ryan and Runswick-Cole (2008), illustrate the relevance of this and connect it to mothers of children with disabilities. They argue that:

…within disability studies mothers of disabled children occupy a liminal position because they are often not disabled and yet they can experience forms of disablism. Their experiences can differ markedly from the experiences of mothers of non-disabled children and yet the consequences and outcomes of these experiences, such as developing a ‘special competence’ is largely overlooked. Mothers can work to effect change on behalf of their children and, in some cases, for disabled people more generally, however, this role of activist mother is largely undervalued (2008:199).

Using a combination of social model of disability and the theory of biographical disruption helps in exploring the impact of a child’s disability on these carers.

33

Mothers often experience liminality due to the uncertainty and disruption of their daily structures caused by the need to provide lifelong care to a child with disabilities. This state of liminality can also be compounded by an interplay of different social categories as the next section will demonstrate.

2.4 Feminist Intersectionality Theory

The preceding section highlighted the relevance of using a social model of disability in understanding the connections between disability and being a mother of a child with disabilities. This is because the model is ‘particularly

helpful in focusing our attention on those aspects of disability that emphasise the commonality of disability and gender, rather than the medical condition or impairment that has relegated disability to the specialised and depoliticised, realm of medicine’ (Emmett, 2006:446).

This section develops discussion about the relevance of understanding overlapping forms of oppression by addressing the interface of different social categories such as gender and disability within the context of other inequalities, and how these can impact on people with disabilities and their carers. As a theory of knowledge, intersectionality elucidates and interprets multiple dimensions and intersecting systems of oppression, disadvantage and privilege (Tsouroufli et al., 2011, Davis, 2008, Yuval-Davis, 2006). A term introduced by Crenshaw (1991), intersectionality is considered as one of the most recent concepts in feminist theories (Carbin and Edenheim, 2013, Cho et al., 2013, Nash, 2008). It was introduced in order to understand how the intersection of social categories such as ethnicity, race, gender and class led to the exploitation, exclusion and oppression of black women from socioeconomic and political activities in the United States (Stoltz, 2014, Crenshaw, 1989). Crenshaw suggested that it was important to investigate the various identities that perpetuated the discrimination and marginalisation of black women. At that time, black women suffered what was referred to as a ‘triple oppression’, that is, ‘as a black’, ‘as a woman’, and ‘as a working class person’ (Crenshaw, 1991, 1989).

34

While early feminist intersectionality scholars (Crenshaw, 1989) focused on social categories relating to black women, contemporary feminists (Walby et al., 2012a, Lewis, 2009, Yuval-Davis, 2006) have constructed intersectionality in such a way that it is used to understand how different identities intersect, and result in some individuals (not only black women) being discriminated against, oppressed or disadvantaged. Further, Yuval-Davis (2006) asserts that social divisions are embedded within social structures such as the family, institutions, organisations and laws. These social structures have a bearing on power relations in society, and are subject to varied interpretation. In the light of this, it is important to consider historical and social contexts when investigating social oppression and divisions in society (Choo and Ferree, 2010).

Thus, intersectionality is a contested concept, many scholars tend to focus on gender, class and race (Walby et al., 2012b, Valentine, 2007), yet, there are some that have also included other aspects such as disability (Moodley and Graham, 2015, Shaw et al., 2012, Emmett, 2006). For example, Emmett illustrates a significant relationship between gender and disability. Significantly, particularly for a study undertaken in Zambia: Emmett’s work:

…locates disability within the context of other social inequalities and disadvantages such as poverty, race and family structure. The complex interconnection of issues such as these have implications not only for families or households in general, but also for women in particular. The role of disability and gender is then considered within the context of developing countries, where conditions such as pervasive poverty, lack of services, and limited recognition of women’s rights have profound implications for both women and people with disabilities (Emmett, 2006:446).

There has been some diversity in theoretical development in feminist intersectionality that has resulted in varying analytical outcomes in academic research. For instance, scholars such as Yoshida and colleagues (2014) have provided another way of viewing and applying theories of intersectionality. They have submitted that categories such as gender, poverty and disability can be seen as ‘forms of oppression that can be conceptualised as simultaneously

35

People that are disadvantaged on the basis of gender, disability, and poverty are said to be experiencing a triple burden. Therefore, employing an intersectional approach is critical in assessing how disability and gender can intersect to produce poor outcomes for the marginalised. Yoshida and colleagues (2014) also support the view that an intersectional approach provides a lens through which a new insight into the lives of people with disabilities and their families can be gained. In this study, intersectionality helps to elucidate how gender, disability and inequalities intersect, and how this might result in poor outcomes for people with disabilities and their families.

From a feminist intersectionality perspective, different structural factors are intertwined, and these compound the impact of gender inequality in society. For example, gender, racism, disability and socio-economic status can intersect to result in more profound oppression and discrimination against an individual (Cho et al., 2013). Interestingly, Erevelles and Minear state that ‘the omission

of disability as a critical category in discussion of intersectionality has disastrous and sometimes deadly consequences’ (2010:28). Therefore, in applying an intersectionality approach to fully understand the experiences of the oppressed, it is important to focus on the impact of other factors such as their class and gender. Intersectionality should not therefore, be looked at in a singular dimension but on how different identities come into play in a complex intersectional way (Gillborn, 2015, Gopaldas, 2013, Shaw et al., 2012) to understand issues of discrimination and marginalisation from a more complex perspective without sacrificing the significance of gender inequalities.

As argued by some commentators, ‘the intersection of multiple systems of

oppression and domination shapes individual and collective experiences and struggles’ (Thiara et al., 2011: 759). In this study, ideas from feminist intersectionality theory help to explore and analyse how the intersection of multiple identities inter alia age, gender, class, disability, and educational background can put women in a vulnerable position, and perpetuate their oppression and poverty (Moodley and Graham, 2015, Pearson, 2010). It is therefore, critical to attend to various identities, as intersecting categories on

36

the basis that these are not merely cultural (Gillborn, 2015, Carbin and Edenheim, 2013, Carbado et al., 2013, Garland-Thomson, 2002). However, feminist intersectionality acknowledge that there are differences among women; hence, the oppression they experience differs depending on their social relations. Additionally, as a theory, researchers have used feminist intersectionality as a lens to gain greater insight into the personal experiences of people by looking at the various aspects that shape their identities and perpetuate their poverty (Tremain, 2013, Cole, 2009).

Furthermore, an intersectionality approach allows for an exploration of different variables that intersect with one another to determine the power dynamics at both the family and societal levels, and how these power dynamics impact on most marginalised members of society. Disability, gender and power can thus, be regarded as emergent and dynamic within the different social and cultural context in which people find themselves. As explained by Yoshida and colleagues (2014), an intersectional approach has the potential to ‘create

spaces for agency within the locations of oppression’ (2014: 2162). The argument is that women have to deal with multiple barriers such as oppression, patriarchal system and gender among others (MacKinnon, 2013, Yuval-Davis, 2006). Citing the Centre for Women’s Global Leadership (2011), Yuval-Davis states that ‘oppressed women and other multiply-burdened groups who are

located at these sections by virtue of their specific identities must negotiate the traffic that flows from the intersections in order to obtain the resources for the normal activities of life’ (Yuval-Davis, 2006:197). Intersectionality is therefore, more broadly concerned with the importance of acknowledging and accounting for the various aspects of identity. It considers areas that are often neglected, but are very important to society, as these can and do perpetuate inequality. Intersectionality can help us to identify and address factors, policies and practices that discriminate against people on the basis of gender, disability and class (MacKinnon, 2013).

The concept of intersectionality has many benefits, but yet weaknesses have also been highlighted. One of its major flaws has been lack of clarity on how it

37

should be studied. As a result it is open to different meanings and interpretations. For example, Chang and Culp (2002) point out the difficulties of paying attention to points of intersection because there is no agreed number of intersections. Furthermore, different scholars point to different identities, (Crenshaw, 1991, Cole, 2009) mentions race, class and gender as the main identities while contemporary scholars (Cho et al., 2013; Yuval-Davis, 2006; Nash, 2008; Shields, 2008) include political, economic and social identities in their analysis of intersectionality. Despite the limitations that have been highlighted, intersectionality remains an important theory especially in feminist research. Within the context of my study, the theory of feminist intersectionality is significant in exploring the nuances of social identities through hearing mothers’ voices and listening as they recount their lived experiences. Of particular interest is assessing whether they believe that they have been impoverished (or face discrimination) due to negative societal attitudes surrounding both women and disabilities. Furthermore, adopting an