2 results
1 - A leg to stand on: irony, autoethnography and ableism in the academy
- Edited by Nicole Brown, University College London
-
- Book:
- Lived Experiences of Ableism in Academia
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 18 December 2021
- Print publication:
- 25 May 2021, pp 17-36
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
Harsh fluorescent lights glare down on me as I enter the tiny, beige room that houses my department's photocopier. The sharp scent of hot toner wafts from the machine as it spits out page after page of what appears to be an exam. Resigned, I place my biannual, state-issued disabled parking certificate on the copier and press several buttons to scan it into an electronic image.
“Hey! How are you?” asks my colleague Ben, as he enters the room and reaches for the pile of copies on the lower tray.
I roll my eyes. “I’m okay, just scanning proof that my leg is still amputated – for next year's parking pass.”
Ben looks back at me incredulously. “Seriously?”
“Yup,” I nod. Sneering, I continue, “My leg still hasn't grown back – shocking!”
“So your permanent disability is actually permanent?” he asks with mock surprise.
“Indeed. If only I came from a family of starfish, maybe there would be hope for regenerating a leg,” I quip.
Ben shakes his head. “That's ridiculous. What a waste of your time and theirs.”
Grateful for his understanding, I say goodbye to Ben and return to my office to dutifully email the scanned certificate to the university parking office.
The demand that I repeatedly provide current documentation of my status as a disabled motorist to my university is, of course, a minor institutional barrier. The parking office's stated goal of ‘accurate and up-to-date record keeping’ requires wasting my time and theirs with bureaucratic nonsense born of an endless well of suspicion. I sarcastically refer to this policy as ‘proving that my leg still has not grown back’, following amputation above the knee due to complications of bone cancer, after almost 20 years of limb-salvaging surgeries. A widespread belief has been articulated to me over the years by various students, faculty, staff and administrators that some (manipulative, even deceitful) disabled faculty unfairly take advantage of university policies such as the small discount in parking rates or priority scheduling of courses, necessitating administrative vigilance. When I do secure a disability accommodation, the cost is an implicit requirement that I be demonstrably appreciative of my university's generosity, performing a relentless, cheerful gratitude and remaining polite, patient and nonconfrontational in the face of ableist policies, practices and microaggressions on my campus.
Healthcare Personnel Perceptions of Hand Hygiene Monitoring Technology
- Katherine Ellingson, Philip M. Polgreen, Amy Schneider, Laura Shinkunas, Lauris C. Kaldjian, Donald Wright, Geb W. Thomas, Alberto M. Segre, Ted Herman, L. Clifford McDonald, Ronda Sinkowitz-Cochran
-
- Journal:
- Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology / Volume 32 / Issue 11 / November 2011
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 02 January 2015, pp. 1091-1096
- Print publication:
- November 2011
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Objective.
To assess healthcare personnel (HCP) perceptions regarding implementation of sensor-based electronic systems for automated hand hygiene adherence monitoring.
Design.Using a mixed-methods approach, structured focus groups were designed to elicit quantitative and qualitative responses on familiarity, comfort level, and perceived impact of sensor-based hand hygiene adherence monitoring
Setting.A university hospital, a Veterans Affairs hospital, and a community hospital in the Midwest.
Participants.Focus groups were homogenous by HCP type, with separate groups held for leadership, midlevel management, and frontline personnel at each hospital.
Results.Overall, 89 HCP participated in 10 focus groups. Levels of familiarity and comfort with electronic oversight technology varied by HCP type; when compared with frontline HCP, those in leadership positions were significantly more familiar with (P<.01) and more comfortable with (P<.01) the technology. The most common concerns cited by participants across groups included lack of accuracy in the data produced, such as the inability of the technology to assess the situational context of hand hygiene opportunities, and the potential punitive use of data produced. Across groups, HCP had decreased tolerance for electronic collection of spatial-temporal data, describing such oversight as Big Brother.
Conclusions.While substantial concerns were expressed by all types of HCP, participants' recommendations for effective implementation of electronic oversight technologies for hand hygiene monitoring included addressing accuracy issues before implementation and transparent communication with frontline HCP about the intended use of the data.