{"title":"为什么埃文斯案中的智障人士在40年后仍然认为华盛顿政府忽视了他们:一段关于残疾人权利的不同观点的历史","authors":"T. Terrar","doi":"10.1515/IJDHD-2016-0019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article is about Washington, DC’s intellectually disabled and the history of their struggle for habilitation rights, which for them includes gainful employment and having a family. Against them has been a conservative local and national government and the US District Court in its rulings over the past 40 years in the Evans et al. v. Bowser case. The disabled have had only limited success in their expansive interpretation of their rights, but by exploiting differences between the government and court, they have obtained concessions concerning basic food, clothing and shelter. For this reason they advocate for an indefinite continuation of the Evans litigation.","PeriodicalId":50278,"journal":{"name":"International Journal on Disability and Human Development","volume":"16 1","pages":"187 - 216"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/IJDHD-2016-0019","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Why the intellectually disabled in the Evans case continue to hold the DC government neglectful after 40 years: a history of differing views about disability rights\",\"authors\":\"T. Terrar\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/IJDHD-2016-0019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This article is about Washington, DC’s intellectually disabled and the history of their struggle for habilitation rights, which for them includes gainful employment and having a family. Against them has been a conservative local and national government and the US District Court in its rulings over the past 40 years in the Evans et al. v. Bowser case. The disabled have had only limited success in their expansive interpretation of their rights, but by exploiting differences between the government and court, they have obtained concessions concerning basic food, clothing and shelter. For this reason they advocate for an indefinite continuation of the Evans litigation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":50278,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal on Disability and Human Development\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"187 - 216\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/IJDHD-2016-0019\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal on Disability and Human Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/IJDHD-2016-0019\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal on Disability and Human Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/IJDHD-2016-0019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Why the intellectually disabled in the Evans case continue to hold the DC government neglectful after 40 years: a history of differing views about disability rights
Abstract This article is about Washington, DC’s intellectually disabled and the history of their struggle for habilitation rights, which for them includes gainful employment and having a family. Against them has been a conservative local and national government and the US District Court in its rulings over the past 40 years in the Evans et al. v. Bowser case. The disabled have had only limited success in their expansive interpretation of their rights, but by exploiting differences between the government and court, they have obtained concessions concerning basic food, clothing and shelter. For this reason they advocate for an indefinite continuation of the Evans litigation.