December 6, 2014 - 18:58
The intersection of disability and age came through repeatedly during my reading of Good Kings Bad Kings in terms of the dichotomy between childhood and adulthood for the residents. For starters, there are the technical ways that age shapes the residents' lives as far as legality goes. Some are wards of the state, so they receive no say in being placed there; additionally, because of the regulation that people with certain disabilities are still legally minors untill age 22 instead of 18, there were diversified ages of those living at ILLC. Conversely, disability complexifies one of the major themes of anyone in the young adult age group--living independently. Teddy specifically dwells on his future, given that he will soon be too old for ILLC and be transferred but instead wanted to get an apartment. Moving out is something young people think about to begin with because of the social pressure to not live with parents beyond childhood. But for the group in ILLC, moving out means escape and independence. In some ways, I think, the two are connected: dependence is correlated with childhood and independence with adulthood. Both of these dichotomies are social constructs, yet they are strong enough to define us and our desires, our expectations and our role in society as a result of those expectations. The ILLC residents, however, have an extenuated reason for wanting independence: ILLC confines them, and living in the "normal world" means freedom. In this way, the harm of institutionalization is introduced as an oppressive force: most of the residents did not willingly (or knowingly) move there; rather, it was the cheapest (or only) way to handle a child--already someone heavily reliant on adults to begin with--with a disability--someone presumably even more dependent (given our society's general averseness to the theme of interdependence).
I also think it's worth mentioning the distinct separation between the adults and the children at ILLC. The adults are the caretakers, the nondisabled individuals who have "sacrificed" their lives to care for disabled children. Some are mentors, while others are oppressors; still, though, they are put on a different level than the children. The one exception to this is Joanne, who crips the system by being the one employee who is also disabled. She scratches at the line between child and adult by belonging to both communities at ILLC (resident and employee); however, she has also succeeded with the aforementioned ideal of living relatively independently (in fact, throughout her relationship with Ricky she grapples with allowing him to help her). Her situation is still problematic given that she is tokenized; however, she also provides a bridge between the residents and staff. By encouraging Yessenia's activism, I found that she was able to promote independence for her not just by fighting for their literal independence but also by encouraging independent thought in questioning the system they are a part of. Yessenia actively changes as a result of finding her voice and speaking out, as do many of the other residents; they try to fight the wall that has been built between them and the adults who care for them by standing up to them and for each other. Their relationships reveal another layer of interdependence as well; not only are they working towards living interdependently in the physical sense, they work towards surviving interdependently by watching out for one another in an institution tainted by corruption.