[Teever]

Really?

You don't think that there are objective and measurable differences in disabilities?

Let's take plegia for example -- all other things being equal which is worse being monoplegic, paraplegic, triplegic, or quadriplegic?

Not recognizing objective differences in quality of life associated with varying disabilities does a disservice to those people with extreme disabilities and minimizes and marginalizes their struggles.

[ok_dad]

You’ve taken the opposite of what I said. Everyone’s disability is a struggle. Everyone’s life is a struggle. We help each other to navigate life and don’t compare.

Answer this: what’s the end goal of comparing disabilities? I’d argue it’s simply to minimize the “easier” ones. Every struggle is hard for the disabled, bar none. There is no logical reason to compare other than to minimize someone’s struggle, so just avoid doing that. Instead, try and figure out how you can help those around you who struggle, disabled or not.

[Teever]

There are objective differences in disabilities and the suffering of the people afflicted with them.

If someone does not recognize that the hardship of losing a pinky finger is not nearly the same as losing an arm, or as the experience of a quadriplegic, they are not making valid assessments of reality and they are not able to provide any help to those people.

I say this as a person who has ADHD and have worked with profoundly disabled people many times in my life.

[ok_dad]

And? What’s the point of comparing? Is there a prize to being the most disabled?

There’s always someone who has it worse by some metric than you, there’s no benefit to setting up a disability podium and awarding prizes.

BTW, your “pinky vs quad” comparison is a huge straw man.

That’s all I’m going to say, you’ve obviously not going to benefit from any further conversation.