Date: Mon, 15 Jan 1996 16:02:45 -0800
From: Claudia Coles (ccoles@dcez.dcez4tag.com)
Subject: Alphans with Disabilities?....Where? :( /
Space Shuttle Program training astronauts with disabilities
[long post - but please read :)]
Hi folks,
I was just curious about something. I always remebered the time on Space:
1999 when Helena Russell and the medical staff would tend to those who had
medical problems on Alpha. Some had infirmities and others injuries.
However, I never really saw on any of the episodes the final outcome of
someone who survived a real traumatic injury such as someone who had lost a
limb, an eye, etc. You would think that after all the serious alien
attacks they had, there would be casualties resulting in these types of
losses. You would hear them sometimes refer to how many people were left
on Alpha and someone dying would be brought up in conversation from time
to time. But you never heard, at least from my recollection, anyone refer
to those with permanent casualties and how they were functioning on Alpha.
And that brings me to my point. We are well aware in today's society that
people who may be disabled are not *unabled*. Some of us, like myself,
have seen people who may be viewed as "disabled", as being more productive
and active with their lives than those with all their "facilities" [ sorry
for the slang folks but I think you get the picture :) ]. So, I always
wondered [ unless I'm overlooking something here ] why we never see them
represented on a show such as Space: 1999, as well as other Sci-Fi programs?
It kind of bothers me that there is such an under representation
concerning persons with disabilities on Sci-Fi shows because, as we all
know, science fiction shows, especially those in the 60's and 70's, were
pioneers and very progressive concerning representation. Look at Star
Trek, TOS for example. That show was a hallmark of representation: an
international and alien crew working together towards a common goal,
people of ethnicity in roles of leadership, etc. Space: 1999 also had
its share of reflecting positive diverse relationships in showing how a
crew, male and female, comprised of different nationalities, could all
work together for the common good. It even featured someone with a
medical condition, Victor Bergman. However, both of these shows, and
others, seem to come short when addressing persons with disabilities'
*abilities* to work in outer space.
Now, speaking as an American [ alas, such that I am ], I must say, I
would love to see our space shuttle program feature someone who has a
disablity. It seems that we show such efforts in trying to get other
types of people represented in the program [ being of African and American
Indian ancestry, I have no qualms about this :) ], that we tend to
overlook those who for years have been waiting to serve in the same
capacity. Why not consider, for example, a person who is parapalegic for
space flight? I'm not talking about someone who we would like to see used
to *learn* about paraplegism (word?) in space [ although that knowledge
may be a by-product from his or her mission ]. I'm talking about a
qualified trained scientist going through the space program and coming out
as a bonafide astronaut. Now of course the space shuttle and other areas
in the program may have to undergo some physical modifications to make it
more suitable for him or her to adapt to space flight (and then again,
maybe not), etc., but I personally feel it is well worth it. If our
space program is trying to put its best foot foward in trying to
allow a diversity of people to take part in the shuttle program, then persons
with disabilities need to be included as well. Perhaps our space program
managers may say that we are not ready for a such a venture yet, but if we
don't start now or at least start considering it now, then when?
And that brings me back to Space: 1999 [ whew :) ! ]. It would have
really been nice to have seen what Alpha would do and how they would adapt
to having personnel with disabilities on the moonbase. It was the ideal
series for this sort of thing because they HAD to deal with people who
survived catastrophes in space and on Alpha. Star Trek and other Sci-Fi
shows just had to transport their severely injured to a starbase and let
those who survived return home and start new lives over again adjusting to
their new medical circumstances. Not so on Alpha. They did not have that
option. They needed every resource they could get. And Alpha's most
valuable resource was the crew itself.
Also, Space: 1999 could have also featured some Alphan personnel with
disabilities (I'm also talking about true actors with disabilities playing
in these roles) from the onset and had them as part of their original
moonbase ensemble. The show would truly have shown us how these crew
members were deamed invaluable to any space program, Alpha's in particular.
This, IMHO, is the true pioneer spirit in which Space: 1999, and other
sci-fi shows like it, have always set out to accomplish.
So how would Alpha have to adapt and adjust itself to accomodate those who
suffered permanent disabiling injuries? Unfortunately, it may be too late
to get Anderson and Freiberger's view on it. However, I'd like to know
what others think on this matter. If anything, it would have definitely
been a time of personal challenges and growth for all those on moonbase
Alpha. Alphan mettle would have been tested over and over again and once
more, they would find out what they were really made of: courage, caring,
and survival.
Peace all.
Respectfully submitted,
your fellow Alphan,
Comm. Ofc. Claudia
*** [ P.S. - I, *in no uncertain terms* mean to offend anyone by this
post. If I have, I apologize in advance and ask that you please e-mail me
directly and let me know. There's no growth without dialogue :) . See
you. ] ***
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 1996 08:14:29 -0800
From: mpoindexter@class44train.com (Marshall Poindexter)
Subject: Re: Alphans with Disabilities?
>allow a diversity of people to take part in the shuttle program, then persons
>with disabilities need to be included as well. Perhaps our space program
>managers may say that we are not ready for a such a venture yet, but if we
>don't start now or at least start considering it now, then when?
This is a great idea. I think the only reason they haven't done it is
because of the strict physical requirements mandated for admission into the
space program. I, for one, strongly considered applying for the space
program but the tubes in my ears and corrective lenses made that
impossible. I'm not sure who exactly set the standards, but perhaps they
should be revised in light of advances in mobility devices that would
enable people with disabilities to go up.
The only Alphan I remember seeing in a wheelchair was a computer guy (I
can't remember his name) whose brain was burned out by the space brain in
"Space Brain." I remember him being wheeled into Main Mission and trying to
interpret what the brain was saying to Alpha. His was a temporary
disability (or so they thought then), so I don't think he qualifies as a
permanently disabled Alphan. Do you, Claudia, or does anyone remember if
Michelle Osgood (Patrick's wife) in season 2's "The Catacombs of the Moon"
ever appeared in a wheelchair? I know she was quite weak from her heart
condition.
Unfortunately, Claudia, seeing anyone dealing with continuing injuries in
the series was pretty much non-existent. As with other continuity problems,
the producers just didn't seem to think that clearly about those issues.
Heck, the characters barely recuperate emotionally from some of their
adventures. Like, how do you think Carolyn Powell felt after she'd killed a
couple of people and held the Moonbase hostage in "The Lambda Factor"? *I*
think she'd be in therapy for a while.
**Here's the kicker, though: In many of the season 1 scenes, characters
have to step over the doorframe into certain rooms. If this is so, then
Moonbase Alpha's original design was decidedly NON-accessible to people
with disabilities. However, I think those doorframes were removed in season
2 (as was the commlock's use as a door opener). So maybe, after realizing
how stupid the original architects were, the Alphans wised up and made the
base more accessible.
(P.S. I think in the 1999 Starlog Technical Manual it states that Victor
helped design and build the base. If that's so, then perhaps they waited
until after he'd died before they made modifications to the base's
accessibility.)
Just my $.02.
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 1996 08:03:41 -0800
From: "John R. Prewitt" (termie@a44quest.com)
Subject: Re: People with disabilities in space
Well, I've been trying to think up a good response to this issue,
so here goes.....
As much as I really don't want to sound all mean, cold, and heartless,
I really do not think that it is feasible for us to put a handicapped
person up into space right now. The way things are right now, a human
goes through a lot of physical stress just to get up there (3 G's at
it's worst point), not to mention a lot of throwing around during
take off and reentry.
Also the fact of...in a crisis situation, normally, everyone would
be able to do something to either save the shuttle or save themselves.
With a handicapped person there, said person might not be able to
help anyone, or even themselves (from what I gather, it's difficult
enough getting around in 1 G, 0 G would probably just be worse..).
Granted, most anyone would say "well, they could probably do it..."
but that's just it, they could _probably_ do that - and who wants
to take that kind of chance with that much money and the life of
the one handicapped person, or maybe even everyone aboard the
shuttle? Astronauts today have to be not just able to use all
parts of their bodies, but really have to be in shape physically
and all that...that job is most certainly _not_ an easy thing to
do for most...uhm, fully funtional people, let alone a handicapped
person.
Now don't anyone start posting responses of "Oh my god, John, how
could you be so cruel and heartless"...etc..etc...etc. Being cruel
and heartless towards handicapped people is not my intent, and I
have personally witnessed many different handicapped people overcome
overwhelming odds and do quite well for themselves....I just don't
think that I personally would want to take _this_ kind of chance.
> NOW FOR ALPHA:
*smile* then they're is my reason why you never see anyone that needs
rehabilitation like that...it would be too difficult to write in to
the script. *giggle* (Note that this is also the best reason to give
for something stupid happening in a Star Trek - I do this all the time,
but I don't want to get off the subject here...)
> DISABILITIES OTHER SCI FI/TELEVISION:
Well, in Trek, etc... one can say that death doesn't bother the
characters because they are military, and somewhat used to the
idea of people dying. Sounds rather callous, but with military
types, sometimes it's true.
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 1996 08:34:46 -0800
From: Rob (kauderr@e44burg.com)
I'm sorry, I've been following this chain of thought, and I finally
find some one who I can agree with. John brings up both an unfortunate yet
realistic assessment. Space Flight isn't for everyone right now, due to the
physical stress involved.
Then again, there are certain occupations throughout American
society that are closed or restricted to different people. Don't think I'm
making fun of the situation when I compare having a peson with disabilities
in space and, say, women in combat.
But the fact of the matter is there are certain requirements for
Astronauts, just as there are for almost every professional, from lawyers to
doctors to the clergy to the military.
I mentioned women in combat a moment ago. The comparison I was
making was that in a 'perfect world' it would be great to have women up on
the front, dodging bullets with the rest of us grunts (Before you ask,
yes...I've been there.)
But right now, it just isn't feasible, at least in America. And the
same applies to persons with disabilities in space. It would be great to
get everyone up there (as we tried with Christa McAuliffe or succeeded with
Senator Jake Garn) and I think the space program has made some strides.
Heck, who would've thought we would have Soviet cosmonauts on the shuttle?
But we have.
The point is that it won't happen now or in the near future.
There's my two cents.
Rob Kauder
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 1996 08:59:55 -0800
From: jquimby@utmmg.med.uth.tmc4tag.edu (Jeanette Quimby)
Well, John
I agree with some of your points - severely, physically handicapped (such as
qaud/paraplegics) probably would hypothetically have great difficulty in
physically withstanding G-forces in take off, and may "get in the way" in an
emergency situation.
But.....blindness and deafness would not "incapacite" (?sp) a person in take
offs/landings, nor in an emergency - a deaf person can see where to go and
see alarms and handle them. A blind person, considering the space and
amount of training, also could probably get around pretty well in an
emergency - look at everyday emergencies - house fires, natural disasters (a
little dazed perhaps, but aren't we all).
Also, concerning the physical training they go through - we currently are
sending quite a few "civilians" and international folks. NASA astronauts do
undergo rigorous training for many years. These other folks probably have
less than 1 year of similar training. Yes they get condition, but I would
not expect to put a disabled person up in space without a similar training
program. Not to say teachers and private industry engineers are in bad
shape, but they are not as rigorously, physicially trained for such an
extensive period that you could not do the same with a handicapped person.
Crisis situations to save selves/shuttles - again, my point with the
civilians. If they can be trained to handle the crises which is normally in
the hands of the pilot/copilot, so could a blind or deaf person. Also, in a
crises, I would assume the school teacher would also be seated and with
minor responsiblities compared to the pilot. Same case in point for the
disabled.
Thank back to the Russians, at one point they were going to "sell" spots on
their shuttle - remember John Denver was going to attempt to buy a seat.
Tell me, John Denver in an emergency in space - picture that!
I don't think you're cruel or heartless John. You are looking at it from a
logical, and I am assuming fully functioning, point of view. Other than my
poor vision and early Alzheimer's , I am not disabled. I just think we
all to have to dream and we all should have the opportunity to attempt to
reach our goals. It bothers me that society restricts the vision of others
by placing restraints that they assume cannot be overcome with technology or
human motivation. Even the most able bodied, fully trained individual could
freeze up in that emergency on the shuttle when it really occurs, and who
knows, it could be the disabled who think it through.
And regarding taking the chance by placing ourselves in the situation with a
disabled person in space - each day we take a chance when getting on the
bus, the subway, walking down the street - that the driver will get us to
our destination safely, that some sicko isn't going to start shooting up the
subway. You take a chance going to a doctor/dentist - do they have a
contagious disease, will blood be spilled, will you catch it. The people
who cook your food in a restaurant - are they clean? did they spit in your
soup, sneeze on your steak? Is the person in the office next to you, really
all there mentally. Or are they going to hit you when you go to the copier,
because you asked if you could make 1 copy (this happened here, I had a tech
hit (punched) because of this). Life is a risk. We can attempt to avoid
the risks by taking every caution and prevention, but a little girl in
Arlington was riding her bike in the daylight in front of people. She was
grabbed off the bike by a stranger and now an autopsy will determine if the
body found last night is hers! Could it have been prevented - don't let her
ride her bike in the day light? I don't see that much additional risk
getting on a shuttle with a blind person. They will be limited, but you
take risk in living every day - what's one more, especially when you know it?
Television writers are attempting to make a point now to ensure inclusion of
minorities and women in more prominent roles on shows (STV). One day, they
will be doing the same for the disabled.
So, John, you're not cold hearted and you're not cruel - you are realistic
in today's standards. But, it takes people like you and me, and the
children of tomorrow to make the change and start accepting "what can be
possible, if we try".
Call me the bleeding heart and optimist - but, I always loved the old Coke
commercial "We'd like to teach the world to sing".
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 1996 10:02:23 -0800
From: jquimby@utmmg.med.uth.tmc4tag.edu (Jeanette Quimby)
Subject: WARNING - GETTING OFF TOPIC - Occupations - Can of worms
I'll end my replies to this subject with this one (hopefully) as it is
slowly going away from S1999 directly, but it is still related to the future
of achieving a future in space.
This can turn into a big can of worms, and I hope it doesn't.
Restricting folks based on sex, disability, or ethnic background from
achieving a particular job in the late 90s and in the next century, should
change from what the current perceived ideas are and have been.
Everyone has to receive training/education to perform a job. Some women
aren't cut out for strenuous labor, and some men are not cut out for
strenuous labor - including the battlefield (let's look at Friendly Fire in
wartime -it's not the women who are commanding and fighting). Warfare is
becoming more technological than compared to World War I. Men and women
both have family responsibilities in todays society - my brother is a single
parent in the ground forces of the Army. Some women are physically fit
enough to serve on the ground and some men aren't, and vice versa.
Women have hormones (estrogen and progesterone) and so do men
(testosterone). So don't use physiologic/anatomologic differences as the
basis to deny the woman the opportunity to fight for this country. You have
peak periods of hormones in your body just like a woman! Look at Tailgate
and other episodes of noncombat male behavior in the military - inexcusible
- don't blame the woman who was manhandled on the flight for not defending
herself from being groped. She tried, but was outnumbered! What, will we
blame the woman for being in the military and placing herself in a position
to be sexually groped as she shouldn't have enlisted to begin with!
When Rob mentions jobs being closed or restricted - he is right it is due to
"American Society" not due to the reality of can the person handle the job.
Look at the individual first and as a person, not as a minority, woman, or
disabled. To select or discredit a person from a job on any of these
reasons is horrible.
I help coordinate the training program for future dermatologists. Yes, we
have them send in photos, give some bio info. But in all fairness, an
applicant should be judged on what they have accomplished, not on "how many
women are in the program, how many minorities, a woman shouldn't be a
surgeon, she should be a pediatrician, etc". If you were truly fair to
yourself and filling that job, you would base it on their qualifications of
meeting the standards that you would expect a person to have. Which in the
end is how they are selected. But yes, people can set a bias in these
standards to eliminate particular groups, but then they are only cheating
themselves and their company/industry of a possible excellent
employee/candidate, etc.
To say that the possibility for this change is not in the near future, would
be to say "stop performing your research on helping overcome the
disabilities". Why do it, if there isn't the future or the possibility for
these people to achieve their fullest potential. Why not tell little girls,
why bother - let the men defend the country, you stay home and raise the
kids. It's hard to find the qualified men to enlist or reenlist, you're
limiting your potential by excluding on the basis of sex, race, or disability.
I tell both my son and daughter, if they want something hard enough - they
have to work hard, be the best that they can, and they might achieve their
goals. I do not restrict them by saying, aww you can't do that, that's only
for __________ type of people. They see no difference between what a boy or
girl can do, nor do they see a difference in skin color or disability - that
is until an outside adult attempts to change what I have taught them - which
is becoming very difficult to overcome.
Stephen Hawkins ideas regarding physics and space are outstanding - yet, he
is severely disabled. Based on his disability alone, I would not dare
attempt to limit that man from adding his input to our space program, nor
would I attempt to not try and figure out a way to help him, if he wanted
it, of reaching the limits of space. If we want it bad enough or are
willing to change our views for the benefit of all, people with handicaps
will make it to space!
I'm sorry for this response, but I'm can't limit my children's futures due
to what society perceives are their roles or places in the job market. My
daughter could be one of the first Alphans or on the space station - but she
should have some control over her future. And who knows, my son could be a
Mr. Mom. If that's what they want to be, they should be able to at least
try to reach that goal.
Jeanette
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 1996 10:06:45 -0800
From: "Stephen M. Arenburg" (arenburg@phobos.astro.uwo4tag.ca)
Subject: Re: Disabilities On Alpha.
For the situation on Alpha I don't think the NASA standard should
apply. Both the moonbase and the Eagles have artificial gravity - thus
the problems of working in space would be the same as working on the
earth. As for ships and emergencies, we have disasters down here too.
The best thing in an emergency is a clear mind and the training to deal
with problems. One could call Victor disabled due to his reliance on a
mechanical heart.