Disabled people - Airbrushed out?

[chris_49]

Well here's an example of one thread about deaf people in the C19th:

http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=709214.0

which contains the post (page 4) where I found that John Skelsey received only an annuity in his parents' will, though a generous one, as PrawnCocktail  mentioned - he was the only childless one, though.

I expect as others have said is the lack of information that causes this topic not to be discussed more often.

[cati]

In our family trees we note the occupation relationships of our forebears - we note where they lived where they moved to and describe the lives they lead.
 But the lives disabled people lived or the relationships they had with other family members are rarely chronicled.  The censuses label them e.g. as 'idiot, or 'imbecile' etc. and that is the end of their story.
Many lived long lives - sometimes in institutions - what was their daily life - where did they 'fit in?'

Too many are simply labelled and forgotten about - is that because they're not as interesting as the able-bodied relatives?

Haven't you answered your own question here?  It's not a matter of them being "not as interesting" - the details of their daily lives - whether in an institution or not - are simply not recorded.

[Ruskie]

I would say that some disabled people we know more about that able bodied, for example many children are listed on the censuses as "student", girls who were probably working both inside and outside the house, listed as "at home" (this tells us nothing). At least with some disabled people we may be told a little more about their physical limitations eg "blind since birth", and where people were admitted to asylums there can be huge amounts of information found in their records if available.

There is not much to be found out about the daily lives of many of our ancestors, able bodied or not. It has nothing to do with being "interesting". BMDs and censuses do not record people due to how interesting they are or were ....

It is likely that there were many more disabled people in communities in the past than we encounter today - and most of them and their families would just get on with life as best they could.

[brigidmac]

some things were not considered disabilities in the past ..just differences

A man who died locally couple of centuries ago was described as being a hunchback

it didnt prevent him from being a soldier

we now know he had scoliosis (spelling)

yes Im talking about King Richard 3rd
 

[heywood]

In our family trees we note the occupation relationships of our forebears - we note where they lived where they moved to and describe the lives they lead.
 But the lives disabled people lived or the relationships they had with other family members are rarely chronicled.  The censuses label them e.g. as 'idiot, or 'imbecile' etc. and that is the end of their story.
Many lived long lives - sometimes in institutions - what was their daily life - where did they 'fit in?'

Too many are simply labelled and forgotten about - is that because they're not as interesting as the able-bodied relatives?

You might be concerned about particular individuals in your family history but that is your family and your tree.
If you look on this site mane people would like to find out about their family members who have been committed to an institution - sometimes the records are available sometimes not. The labels attached to folk really do bother people. It is upsetting.
What makes you think that they didn’t ‘fit in’  or are not as interesting as able bodied people?
Where is your evidence for your assertions?
If any disability is within living memory, then the family would be aware of this. If it is not and not recorded in the appropriate column then that would not be noted.

[Maiden Stone]

Research into my families found only 1 person (James) officially recorded as having a disability. He was described as "idiot" on 1 census. It's not mentioned on any other census, before or after. He had no occupation on the census when he was classed as "idiot". He had occupations on 2 of the others, farm labourer like his father and in a cotton mill like his sisters. Fortunately his mother had a long life so he was able to live at home for much of his. He was the only son among many daughters. He didn't marry. When he died it meant there were no more bearers of that surname in my family. Before I knew about his disability I wondered why he hadn't married. His eldest sister, my 3xGGM named her 1st son James.

[Jomot]

But the lives disabled people lived or the relationships they had with other family members are rarely chronicled.  The censuses label them e.g. as 'idiot, or 'imbecile' etc. and that is the end of their story.
Many lived long lives - sometimes in institutions - what was their daily life - where did they 'fit in?'

Believe me, I've tried.  Of the hydrocephalus example I mentioned earlier, the most I've been able to find out is from the asylum records, which note that 'he sits up in a chair during the day'.  There is no mention of whether anyone visited or any other activity he might have engaged in.   Before his admission I have no idea what his daily life was like, but he obviously lived at home and was presumably looked after by his mother & siblings, as it was noted that he had not received any care or treatment before his admission.

If we can't find it, we can't chronicle it.

[groom]

In our family trees we note the occupation relationships of our forebears - we note where they lived where they moved to and describe the lives they lead.
 But the lives disabled people lived or the relationships they had with other family members are rarely chronicled.  The censuses label them e.g. as 'idiot, or 'imbecile' etc. and that is the end of their story.
Many lived long lives - sometimes in institutions - what was their daily life - where did they 'fit in?'

Too many are simply labelled and forgotten about - is that because they're not as interesting as the able-bodied relatives?

That's a very sweeping statement, presumably based on how you record things on your tree. How do you know what other people do?  As has been stated previously, information is sometimes hard to come by, but not all disabled people lived in institutions, many lived at home and as such are recorded as living with parents and then perhaps with siblings after the parents' deaths. I'm sure that majority of people do not ignore any member of their family, but record their lives to the best of their ability.

[Ayashi]

I want to get hold of the asylum records for my 2xgt's daughter with the epilepsy but she comes under the 100 year rule.