This article reviews current multicultural thinking, and offers a critical view of the advantages and disadvantages of positioning disability within the emergent multicultural discourse. Implications for future thinking and action to promote equal opportunity and self-determination for persons with disabilities as a cultural group with a political agenda are then advanced.
This article will also provides an overview of the concept of acculturation and reviews existing evidence about the possible relationships between acculturation and selected health and behavioral outcomes among Latinos.
Then, we advance a discussion of multiculturalism and offer a critical review of the main thinking in this arena. Within the context of current multicultural thinking, we examine the advantages of positioning disability within a multicultural context and conclude by posing a challenge to the disability community raised by the poignant issues presented in this article.
In contrast to the conclusions reached by the Supplement to the Surgeon General's report on mental health, there is evidence that the various ethnic minority groups may exhibit significant differences in the prevalence of mental disorder. These differences cannot be fully explained by disparities or inequities in mental health services. African Americans appear to have relatively low prevalence rates despite a history of prejudice, discrimination, and the resulting stress.
Cultural diversity is an enduring fact of social life. Cultural differences exist within nations, and nations share a planet that is home to many different cultures. Even in the most homogenous of countries, where people recognize common ethnicity, speak the same language, and for the most part share one faith, there are subcultures shaped by conditions such as cast, occupation, wealth, and geography. In many countries, different ethnic, linguistic, and religious communities interact while seeking to retain their group identities. In the history of humankind, it is difficult to find a social system more tolerant of diversity than liberal society. Religious and ethnic minorities live under the protection of liberal institutions, and even groups that bitterly oppose liberalism flourish within liberal democracies so long as they observe the laws of the land. Yet not all cultures are compatible with liberalism in the classical sense, and the failure to recognize this fact may imperil liberal society.
The challenge for liberal society is to maintain the greatest degree of freedom compatible with its own existence. In this article, I consider the classical liberal responses to certain key questions that cultural diversity poses. Note that I use the term liberal in its classical sense, not in the modern North American sense.
Cultural diversity raises five issues for liberal society. The first concerns the extent to which liberal society can or should tolerate the illiberal norms and practices of cultural communities within it. How can liberal society protect its institutional framework without harming itself? The second concerns cultural groups' claims for state aid in the preservation of their cultures. I consider here the politics and philosophy of multiculturalism. The third concerns cultural groups' claims for political self-determination leading to various degrees of devolution of power, from federal arrangements to complete ...