*sighs*

[conuly]

So, somebody posted that annoying flashy image saying that "Marriage is not about Race, Religion, National Origin, Gender, Physical Disability, Et Cetera" on a couple of comms I'm in.

Wait... physical disability?

Which is pretty much what I said, prompting the reply that "well, people with mental disabilities have to be screened to make sure that they understand and consent to marriage".

Maybe I'm wrong here, but I thought that depression was considered a mental disability? And bipolar disorder? And our favorite syndrome, asperger's (let's not get into that debate again, I have a point to make)? And I suppose dyslexia could be considered a mental disability, being as how it's a disability of the mind (though I recognize that this isn't the normal term used), and ADD, and... well, other things. Heck, one could make the case that being in love is a mental disability.

But maybe I'm mistaken.

Comments

[kibbles.livejournal.com]

It's difficult, understandable, but it's something that shouldn't be taken lightly by those who DO any sort of screening. Unfortunately, as a society, we've been too judgemental about those who can have relationships. Did you know now you need 90 days to consent to a tubal during a csection because women on welfare in the 70s were asked on the table or in labor if they wanted it, and were pressured to get sterilized? And it happened, of course, to skew towards minorities.

Do you know what kind of screening is done now? In a place like an institution where they have you under close supervision, it would be easier to deny someone the right to marry but what about outside of that?

[leora.livejournal.com]

I don't really know details, but I doubt it's done lightly. I've only heard of it being done in institutions, and not always for marriage, but also to see who may room with whom. And the only time I've really heard it spoken of, it's been by people who found it incredibly difficult. THey agonized over wanting to let people have fulfilling human relationships, which we know that most people can enjoy regardless of IQ, versus not wanting people to be raped or abused, which is a serious risk.

As institutionalization becomes less common and more people are cared for in other ways (a trend I am quite fond of, btw) there will probably need to be something worked out to determine how to protect and best serve the needs of people in these cases. But I'm not sure if anything is yet or how it'd be done.

It's not a job I'd want to have. It's just too hard to make a decision like that.