Sten Leinasaar, intern at Helpific studying at Skidmore College in New York State, and Oliver Püvi, volunteer at Helpific studying at Warwick University in UK, share their opinions about accessibility as well as the media’s attitude towards people with special needs. 

What did the term “special need” mean to you as a kid, how has this definition changed?

Sten: I remember when I was just a kid and watched a lot of movies, special need meant being in a wheelchair. I am not sure if this is media’s myopic understanding of a special need, but it influenced the formation of my definition of a special need. My understanding began to change thanks to the possibility of discover the world through travel and study in university in the US. I also believe that reading has been one of the great ways to educate myself.

Oliver: I have to admit that I did not have much exposure to questions surrounding special needs when I was younger. As such, my brightest memory comes from literature – by David Hill’s book “See ya Simon,” which describes the life of a boy suffering from muscular dystrophy through the eyes of his friend. The tough perception that the book created of the life of people with special needs stuck to my mind. As I was fairly young at the time, the will to help that the book created did not materialize at that time, however I have found that drive once again.

How do you think the attitude towards people with special needs differ in Estonia and the UK/USA?

Sten: Being in Estonia, I feel that discussion in certain topics makes a lot of people uncomfortable. I don’t feel that in the US, because quite often there are open discussions in various topics. I think that a person with special needs is a far more common in there as in Estonia due to the population. It is important to note, however, that life on the other side of the ocean isn’t ideal. Quite often people with special needs are looked at as inferior. I’m glad and hopeful that Estonian government has a team working on the problems that accessibility in our society brings, even though the decision there are also made by an average healthy person. These decision makers might know more about what people with special needs require than average person, but is their attitude towards people with special needs full of empathy and without prejudice? I think there is still a long way to go to dismantle prejudice ideas about special needs and to ensure that the topic wouldn’t be taboo in our society nor a source of discomfort.

Oliver: It has always seemed to me that in England as well as in Estonia, I am surrounded with people who comprehend the needs of others. Nevertheless, care for people with special needs is not a central debate nor a daily topic of discussion in either of those contexts.

The ignorance manifests itself especially in England, where the main topics of debate seem to always be racism and economic questions. Other problems remain in the shadows of those two and are often brought up merely as a small part of a bigger issue. Media in the UK portrays the issues related to care for people with special needs as a factor in other areas, not as a central topic on its own. Even if the topic is discussed, then often in negative light. Although articles concerning questions surrounding social care and care for people with special needs has risen in the last decade, then so has the proportion of articles that view disability benefits as a burden to the society. Journalists have argued that there is a large proportion of people that claim those benefits although they do not need them and as such, argue for cutting those benefits. Some have even argued, that the economy suffers because of such exploitation of the benefits that they perceive as too generous. 

On the other hand, it seems that the general attitude towards people with special needs is better. As it usually is in smaller countries, the approach to issues is usually individual and generally does not target the group as a whole. Media usually focuses on particular cases – it looks at either individuals or businesses and how they tackle the issues surrounding the topic, rather than portraying the questions on people with special needs as some abstract concept which does not revolve around people. Of course there are people who take a negative stance on funding institutions that develop social care and see it as unnecessary. However, I believe that we should not judge a society based on the alternative opinion of the few. I do hope though, that the positive and humane approach that media has largely taken, will affect those people as well at some point.

What has your university done to make people with special needs feel more included?

Sten: My school, Skidmore College, has said that they try to be all inclusive and a sanctuary to everyone in need. Undoubtedly there are ways to improve. Accessibility to buildings is not good enough. For example, one has to open automatic doors by hand as the buttons don’t work due to the fact that everyone uses the button. This, however, is a no easy task to a person in a wheelchair.  Luckily there are helpful students around, but that won’t be the case always. I also understand that people with special needs want to be as independent as possible. There is a building on campus that requires people in a wheelchair to enter from the back of the building as the elevator is there. This can be seen as a microaggression that sends a message, “we don’t want you to be seen entering from the front.” Luckily there aren’t many stairs on our campus and most bases have the ramp. The school uses the natural environment to the fullest, but some declines are really steep. It is difficult to find universal solutions that work for everyone without open discussion. There are prejudiced understandings towards people with special needs that need to be discussed and talked about.

Oliver: University of Warwick usually has a decent approach to issues surrounding both – mental as well as physical special needs.

There is an elevator in each university building that is at least two stories high and there is a ramp on, or near, each staircase. In addition, in the most visited buildings (eg. the library), there is an elevator meant specifically for people with special needs.

There are workshops as well as special exam conditions established for people that have special needs that cause difficulties in learning. Besides, it is possible to book a free appointment with a doctor in the university for people who think they might have undiscovered medical issues. However, this check is not necessary to receive special exam conditions, as long as there is a medical certificate from any country that proves that need. It is also possible to apply for medical financial support if necessary.

Students are always able to turn to a dedicated member of staff or to a voting student member of the relevant committee, if there are any oversights when it comes to care for people with special needs. To ensure fair treatment of students with special needs, there is a student member in each committee that deals with questions surrounding such students.

In your opinion, what can your university change in their approach and how?

Sten: Skidmore’s campus is small and already quite accessible. I find that the best way forward is to have open discussions, which require that school really would listen to the thoughts that we, students, have. We need to dismantle the prejudice ideas and keep moving forward.

Oliver: Because of the large size of the university (ca 24 000 students) there seems to arise the same phenomenon in Warwick as does in UK in general – student often becomes a statistical factor. As such, the theoretical framework of help that I presented beforehand, does not always find flawless implementation.

Last year there was a case, which caused anger among students. A young medical student was expelled from the university because of her special needs. As she was had both mental and physical special needs, the university deemed her unappropriate to deal with patients of her own. Although such behaviour was met with uproar from student body, as well as a directive from an autonomous body to revise the decision, the university did not respond. As such, university’s response stood.

That case revealed two issues – the body that assesses whether the student qualifies to special conditions does not have any members from university’s hospital nor from the mental health helpline. In addition the committee does not listen to the autonomous bodies that have more expertise in the field than they do. As I am away from higher decision making powers in the university, it seems that there is a simple solution to these issues – include more students as well as professionals of their own field to the committees making such drastic decisions. Such members would bring more humane and more sensible approach to such issues.