If I had to describe the “Death Cafe”, I would say that it is a safe place for the discourse of death. It is a place where people can come together and discuss death in a way that is outside of ourselves. It allows for an intellectual discussion on something that is normally quite personal and tragic.
In their introduction, I find that the speakers were influential in sharing their experiences of disability and representation in the media. Something about their presentation reminded me of Chandler’s idea about how it is not enough to just be tolerated in the media for having a disability. The idea of inclusivity and acceptance is a dream for people living outside of the typically casted role in popular culture. By hosting a Death Case, these presenters are challenging the relations of power and privilege that are present in society. They are taking the discourse into their own hands, and defining what it means to live with a disability. They are opposing the idea that is heavily discussed by Chandler- that it is easier to be dead than to live with a disability.
Chandler discusses how easily you can find pieces of literature or film representing the ease at which somebody with a disability can access assisted suicide. She discusses how putting this content in the media gives the world the message that the discourse of disability is simple- it is even less desirable than being dead. It tells people that if they have a disability, they can find a way out. It paints the picture of the ultimate tragedy. It makes disability and a life of disappointment synonymous.
In my life, I have dealt with a lot of disability personally. I have many friends and family members with intellectual disabilities, and I am trained in all scenarios, because my line of work requires me to be. Frankly, movies like “Me Before You”- that tells the tale of a man that would rather be dead than disabled- make me sick to my stomach. Similarly, shows like “Atypical”, which paint the picture of the goal that the disabled person should work towards, implements a way of thought that says that the life of a disabled person is not enough, and they should aim to be like everyone else.
For this reason, during the Death Cafe, my group’s discussion on the discourse of death took many different turns. The one question that really had me thinking was “is there an afterlife?” The reason this had me thinking was because when I was growing up, my family was very religious. I, myself, identify myself as Catholic. With this, I feel that there is an afterlife, and I will go there when it is my time. However, this got me thinking about disability, and how the media tells disabled people that they would be better off dead. Do people with disabilities find themselves worried about an afterlife? I find that this question made me sad. I knew a boy once that mentioned how he hoped that when he died, his spirit wouldn’t be disabled. He said that he didn’t want to have to bring his wheelchair with him. He said that he hoped he could hear perfectly in Heaven without a hearing aid. I always wondered about that comment, but now I think I understand. He never saw himself as complete and perfect. He saw himself as imperfect and flawed, and unworthy of humanity. And now I feel that the media may have been the cause of that.
Overall, I am a very private person, and I struggled with the Death Cafe because it forces you to bring memories to mind that you might have been harboring on purpose. However, I do know the importance of this discourse, and I do think that Chandler would be very pleased to know that people were getting together to break the boundaries of what it means to be disabled in the culture that we live in. I think that Chandler would be happy that people were having difficult and uncomfortable conversations, because I feel that is how all changes begin.
