Check back often for regular updates!
Access is often framed as something available, as long as someone asks. Organizations say things like, “Let us know what you need,” or “Request accommodation in advance.” On the surface, this sounds reasonable. It suggests openness and willingness to support. But it also shifts responsibility onto the person who is already facing the barrier. When access depends on asking, it
Inclusion is often described as a value. Equity is often framed as a commitment. Organizations publish accessibility statements, adopt policies, and speak about diversity in strategic plans. These efforts matter. They signal intention and direction. But intention alone does not create impact. Without accountability, equity remains aspirational. When accessibility fails – when interpreters are not secured in time, when communication
Accessibility is often treated as something that can be arranged when needed. It becomes a request to accommodate, a service to book, or a detail to manage once everything else is already in place. But access is not a favour. It is part of infrastructure. And infrastructure requires funding. When organizations say they value inclusion, that commitment should be visible
“Let’s collaborate.” It’s a phrase I hear often; in emails, proposals, and partnership conversations. And collaboration is a good thing. But collaboration without shared power is not partnership.It’s control with softer language. When Collaboration Sounds Good, But Isn’t Equal Sometimes collaboration looks like this: Deaf professionals are invited to contribute.Asked to provide expertise.Brought in to review or deliver. But the
Inclusion is everywhere right now. It’s in mission statements.In strategic plans.In funding applications.In social media captions. But inclusion written on paper is not the same as inclusion in practice. And sometimes, what looks like inclusion is actually just the illusion of it. When Inclusion Becomes a Checkbox Many organizations genuinely want to “do better.” They add captions. They book an
Lately, I’ve been hearing a familiar phrase more often: “This project is Deaf-informed.” It sounds promising. It suggests care, consultation, and inclusion. But here’s the truth: Deaf-informed isn’t the same as Deaf-led. and the difference matters. Deaf-Informed Still Keeps Power Elsewhere In many projects, Deaf people are brought in to review materials, validate signs, or provide feedback after decisions have
