Cak Fu

Seorang sahabat yang berprofesi sebagai guru di sebuah SMU Negeri di Surabaya bercerita pada saya bahwa dia merasa sangat kesulitan untuk menerangkan mata pelajaran kimia kepada salah satu siswanya yang tuna netra di kelasnya. Di satu sisi dia merasa sangat kesulitan dan sepertinya hampir putus asa, namun di sisi lain dia merasa bahwa tanggungjawabnya adalah mencerdaskan seluruh siswanya tanpa terkecuali termasuk siswa difabel. Sahabat saya tersebut kemudian terus berusaha untuk menemukan cara yang tepat guna mengajarkan ilmu kimia kepada salah satu siswanya yang tuna netra. Sementara siswa tuna netra tersebut semakin merasa tersisih dari proses belajar dalam kelas tersebut karena kebutuhannya informasi yang cukup tidak terakomodasi dengan metode belajar yang dilakukan. (more…)

Seminggu yang lalu saya bertanya kepada salah seorang teman difabel tentang siapa calon gubernur favoritnya. Ternyata jawabnya di luar dugaan saya, teman saya tersebut tidak memilih satupun cagub dan cawagub Jatim yang sekarang lagi sering muncul di media masa. Ketika saya tanya alasannya, teman saya tadi menjawab sangat sederhana,”Karena dari dulu hingga sekarang tidak satupun gubernur yang peduli dengan keberadaan kaum difabel”. Teman saya tersebut kemudian mencontohkan bagaimana susahnya dia mengakses gedung Kantor Kelurahan di daerahnya ketika dia harus mengurus perpanjangan KTP. Selain itu dari dulu hingga sekarang sarana transportasi yang ada di Surabaya tidak ramah dengan kondisi difabel hingga menyulitkan mobilitasnya. Menurutnya kondisi ini tidak berubah dari tahun ke tahun meskipun gubernurnya sudah berganti beberapa kali.

Ironis memang, namun itulah kenyataannya. Ketika banyak orang sibuk memilih dan memilah calon terbaik untuk duduk sebagai Gubernur dan Wakil Gubernur Jatim, teman saya justeru acuh tak acuh dengan persoalan tersebut. Bisa jadi ini hanya bentuk kekecewaan seorang teman, namun mungkin juga kekecewaan teman saya ini merupakan potret apatisme politik sebagian kaum pinggiran terhadap sistem politik dewasa ini. (more…)

Seperti yang telah saya ceritakan pada ANUGRAH 1 bahwa saya sangat menikmati masa kecil saya sebagaimana anak – anak pada umumnya. Saya bermain bersama dengan teman sebaya tanpa perasaan minder. Hal ini sangat dipengaruhi oleh pola asuh orang tua terhadap diri saya pada masa kanak – kanak. Orang tua saya tidak membedakan antara saya dengan adik - adik saya.

Sebagai orang tua, ayah dan ibu saya punya keinginan agar anaknya (saya) dapat “sembuh” dan menjadi sebagaimana anak – anak pada umumnya. Ayah saya khususnya yang punya keinginan besar agar saya dapat kembali normal. Banyak usaha yang telah dilakukan oleh ayah saya untuk mengusahakan kesembuhan saya. Sudah tidak terhitung berapa dukun, para normal, hingga kyai, dan dokter yang telah kami kunjungi, namun semuanya nihil. (more…)

Kali ini saya akan menuliskan sebuah rangkaian artikel secara bersambung yang berkisah tentang perjalanan hidup pribadi, perjalanan ideology, serta perjalanan spiritual saya dalam pergulatan dengan kehidupan sebagai seorang difabel. Saya merasa perlu untuk menuangkan rekaman hidup saya ke dalam tulisan di web ini karena saya melihat bahwa perjalan hidup pribadi saya sebagai seorang difabel merupakan potret kehidupan dan sekaligus pola interaksi sosial masyarakat terhadap difabel.

Sengaja judul dari artikel bersambung ini saya buat sama yaitu ANUGRAH dan hanya menambahkan angka secara berurutan di belakang kata ANUGRAH guna memudahkan pembaca mengenali urutan artikel. Kata ANUGRAH saya pilih sebagai judul, karena saya memandang kondisi difabel saya sebagai anugrah dari Tuhan yang luar biasa. Proses kesadaran untuk sampai menerima kondisi difabel sebagai anugrah akan didapatkan penjelasannya di sepanjang rangkaian artikel ini. (more…)

Seorang teman difabel saya mintai pendapatnya jika ada seseorang memberikan bantuan cuma-cuma kepadanya berupa uang. Kemudian teman saya berkomentar,”ya wajar mas, kita kan difabel. Itu sudah menjadi kewajiban mereka untuk membantu yang lemah seperti kita”.

Saya sejenak terdiam dan kemudian mencoba untuk bertanya kembali,”apa Anda tidak merasa tersinggung dengan sikap orang tersebut?”. Teman saya menjawab,”lho kenapa harus tersinggung?memang faktanya kita difabel, dan itu sudah kewajiban pemerintah dan masyarakat untuk membantu kita”.

Respon yang hampir sama saya dapatkan dari beberapa teman difabel meskipun dengan corak bahasa yang berbeda. Namun sebagian besar dari mereka memaklumi dan memandang bahwa “bantuan” baik dalam bentuk materi maupun non-materi merupakan hal yang wajar bagi mereka. Sehingga mereka sebagai difabel merasa layak untuk menerima bantuan yang diberikan oleh orang lain secara cuma-cuma. Jawaban dan respon teman difabel tersebut membuat saya bertanya,”apakah jawaban dan respon teman tersebut memang benar adanya? Ataukah memang itu yang selayaknya terjadi dalam kehidupan difabel?”. (more…)

Disasters not only have an impact on persons with existing disabilities but may also create a new generation of disabled. Disabled people are recognised in humanitarian assistance as a vulnerable group, together with other vulnerable groups such as women, children, elderly people, and people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWH/A). Each vulnerable group may suffer specific disadvantages in coping with a disaster and may face physical, cultural, and social barrier in accessing the services and support to which they are entitled.

Further, these conditions bring about different characteristics which influence the ways assistance is rendered in a crisis situation. The characteristics of vulnerable groups are often based on their different and specific needs which relate to the context of the local culture, religion and geographical location. Therefore, special care must be taken to protect and provide for all vulnerable groups accordingly.

(more…)

The needs of disabled survivors can be analysed using the six dimensions of comprehensive security. to show that there is indeed a lack of these security elements in their lives. Comprehensive security is defined as the absence of threats against the physical and functional well-being and their form of political and social organisation.
The first dimension is political security which can be defined, in terms of disability, as a position of disabled people in the state. This comes from the idea that a disabled person is personally a member of the state who has the same rights as other citizens. Citizenship, with equal participation in a national community, is one means of achieving social and political integration, either through the general acceptance of common values or through the negotiation of divisive inequalities. Therefore, the absence of needs of disabled people in Aceh after the Tsunami can be seen as a failure of the state to fulfil its responsibilities to disabled people. In addition, it is assumed that the government does not carry out the needs of disabled people in Aceh because disabled survivors are powerless and lack bargaining position at the political level. (more…)

There are two approaches used in the analytical framework of Comprehensive Security, based on the strategic interaction among the actors – the Normative Approach and the Subjective Approach . The Normative (Top-Down) point of view is based on the ideal of achieving universal values like human rights, freedom from fear and freedom from wants. The problem here is that sometimes the universal values such as human rights, civil society, etc are not applicable to every culture. Taking an example from human security using the normative point of view, the value of human rights which is based on Western culture focuses more on respect for the individual freedom, while in Eastern culture, collectivity is taken to be the main value in the most social activities. Thus, cultural respect should be taken into account in applying the normative model of comprehensive security. The second approach is the subjective (bottom-up) point of view that is established on the objective condition of society. This model defines that comprehensive security as the main goal can only be reached if the basic needs of society are fulfilled. This concept generates a question: in what ways can the basic needs (human security) of society be fulfilled when the state security is absent, since state security such as stability of the state is required to ensure human security. Comprehensive Security comprises two inter-related components: five core concepts and six core dimensions. These components help in analysing complex situations of comprehensive security. This framework analyses the disaster situation in two ways – by looking at the diagnostic problem and the intervention problem. In both cases, it has to be clarified as to who or what exactly is affected by the disaster or the intervention at a particular moment. Further, the framework elaborates five core concepts (actor, goals, resources, interactions, and institutions) with six dimensions of comprehensive security (political security, economic security, environmental security, heath security, food security, and social security) to answer these questions.
(more…)

The concept of comprehensive security has changed with developments in the international situation. The global market issue and issue of universality (Human Rights, Gender, Civil Society, etc) have influenced the awareness of the people around the world concerning individual freedom. The debate of security emerged in the 17th century when it defined that the state had the rights to protect its citizenship. Traditionally, the notion of security is described as the state’s ability to counter external threats, and this is documented in Chapter VII of the UN Charter 1945. In the classical formulation, security is about how states use force to manage threats to their territorial integrity, their autonomy, and their domestic political order, primarily from other states. Therefore, a critic would take issue with this classical definition that the notion of security is unilateralist which is restricted to the military threat from the rival state. The other criticism is that the meaning of security in the classical formulation implicitly points to the protection and the welfare of the state. With this, the question arises as to how the state welfare can be reached when the welfare and the protection of individuals or citizens are not ensured. (more…)

In order to give a clear understanding on this pilot project, the definition of disabled people will be discussed first. There is dissimilarity among scientists in the definition of disability. This dissimilarity causes differences in defining the data of disabled people which are published by institutions. For instance, data from medical institutions often refer to the medical term while social institutions use a broader definition which includes the social condition of the disabled person such as ability to perform normally in a society. Lexically, disability is defined as: 1) a physical or mental condition which means that you cannot use a part of your body completely or easily. 2) The state of not being able to use a part of your body completely or easily; the state of not being able to learn easily. Further, Oxford dictionary specifies the definition of disability in terms of the causes of being disabled. Disabled is defined as ‘unable to use a part of the body completely or easily because of a physical condition, illness, injury, etcetera; unable to learn easily, mentally disabled’. These definitions are normally used in common conversations when people refer to the definition of disability or disabled people. Scientists have also given a social definition on disability. Handicap is a state of disadvantage for a given individual resulting from an impairment or disability that limits or prevents the fulfilment of a role that is normal (depending on age, sex, and social as well as cultural factors). In this definition, handicap is related to the cultural condition of the given person, which describes his social and also economic roles in the society compared to other members. Further, the status of the disabled is linked to the interaction of the persons with specific circumstances and culture. Someone who is considered a handicap in a certain society may not be considered as one in another society. (more…)