Theses and Dissertations

The United States houses only five percent of the world’s population but over 20% of its prison population. There has been a dramatic increase in carceral numbers over the last several decades with much of this population being people with mental illness designations. Many scholars attribute this phenomenon to the process of deinstitutionalization, in which mental health institutions in the U.S. were shut down in the 1950s and ‘60s. However, disability scholar Liat Ben-Moshe argues that this is a dangerous oversimplification that fails to credit the deinstitutionalization movement as an abolitionist movement and to take into account shifting demographics between institutions and prisons/jails. This study considers how mass incarceration in the U.S. stems from a trend of isolating and punishing BIPOC and people with disabilities at disproportionate rates as it explores lived experiences at the intersection of mental health and incarceration. Findings inform an abolitionist agenda by highlighting the near impossibility of rehabilitation and treatment in an inherently traumatizing space.

Using critical disability theory, Foucauldian philosophy, phenomenology and my personal lived experience with a congenital impairment, the purpose of this paper is to explore a relatively unexplored subject, stigma against disability onset at birth, and how this manifests in inequitable U.S. electoral outcomes. The scope of the paper is mostly focused on federal U.S. elected officials for two reasons: the high visibility of the position and the ideal standards for an elected official. The U.S. candidates running for federal offices receive the most social attention, drawing from millions of Americans whose views on these candidates determine their electoral success. An analysis of disability representation at this level serves as the best indicator for the stigma held against congenital disability. Additionally, the role of an elected official embodies not just the model citizen but the archetypal human. An exploration of U.S. constituent perspectives on this role in politics suggest social norms locate congenitally disabled people in a particularly marginalized identity. Insights gained from this analysis might allow readers to restructure narrow assumptions about disabled people and what would constitute effective representation.