From Mr G. C. Cardona

I refer to the article about the winner of the Pope John XXIII prize for kindness, and would like to make some reflections and comments. First of all, I can state that I speak from experience because a close friend of mine once received this same prize a few years back.

I do encourage young people such as Sean and Matthew to continue being friends, but not for the reasons that society gives.

The fact is that when a prize is awarded we assume there is some sort of competition. While competition is healthy, one also assumes that there is a winner – or that one person is better than another. Is this criterion suitable for values such as kindness or love?

Who is suited to judge our feelings and intentions, except for God?

When we intrude into the private life of others, non-disabled or otherwise, we tend to be quick in our judgements.

Why is it that when a friendship develops between a non-disabled child and a disabled one, we automatically assume that the non-disabled child is “being patient” or “sacrificing” his/her time to be with his/her disabled friend?

When my friend was awarded the prize I realised that in the eyes of society I could never be equal. And that was not fair.

Have the organisers of this annual event ever stopped to think about what Matthew is contributing to this friendship? Why are disabled people always perceived to be on the receiving end?

Has anyone ever stopped to think about the impact this has on the lives of the children?

If the non-disabled child should be an example of social solidarity, what does the disabled child signify exactly?

I feel that this may be a hurtful truth but difference here is portrayed as being somewhat wrong or inferior. Is this what we want our children to learn? That we are doing a favour to disabled children by including them in our everyday lives, and that it isn’t really necessary? And that he or she will always be “less fortunate” than we are, or to put it more kindly, “special”?

I feel that the very existence of a prize for kindness, many times awarded to non-disabled children who “help” their disabled peers is inconsistent with a message of solidarity.

Solidarity, in my view, is about recognising that every member of society is a valued member of that society, and that inclusion is not a bonus but part of our responsibility as a society. This prize perpetuates charity and an image of dependency, not of interdependence.

It would be a tragedy if we persist in dividing disabled and non-disabled children into categories of helpers and of the helped. The fact is disabled children are not that different from their non-disabled peers. The fact that they do things differently does not make them less human or more disadvantaged. Let us not forget that in society we cannot live without others. The fact that children such as Matthew and Sean enjoy each other’s company is positive because it means that they value each other for who they are. It is society that discriminates between one and the other, because in this relationship, according to its myopic view. one must be providing and the other benefiting – just because the latter happens to be a disabled child!

At the end of it all, maintaining a status quo based on inequalities is the final message we receive. And that is the price we, as disabled people, have to pay on a daily basis.

Gordon C. Cardona

PAOLA