I appreciate your contribution on this, but I disagree on a few points. You have to remember his mother and brother have been looking for ways to get Derrick to communicate beyond the sign language that he’d been using. That’s why John approached Anna in the first place. People act like they didn’t want him to have independence when the truth is because of his conditions he cannot. Yes, there are many people with CP who have no mental barriers. Derrick is not one of them. He was diagnosed as non verbal with severe mental re+ardation by several doctors. His family desperately wanted Facilitated Communication to work for him. They wanted him to be able to express himself. He was not able. It was all Anna. If he was able to communicate his love for red wine over beer, why didn’t he ever communicate that he had to use the restroom? Why didn’t he write that he was hungry instead of banging on the refrigerator? Why did he never communicate that he had a bad dream, had an itch, that he wanted to do a particular activity? The truth is Anna Stubblefield took advantage of a disabled man who could not consent. She got off easy and I wish she was under the jail instead of giving interviews about the man that she raped. I do agree that people with disabilities are often infantilized, but in this case, with a non-verbal man who wore diapers and could barely walk on his own, this treatment was justified. Anna Stubblefield is a manipulative rapist, end of story. The whys don’t matter.
I agree on many aspects, but while it might have been known as severe mental retardation in the past and even when he was first diagnosed, for all I know, that term is no longer used or acceptable. Intellectual disability is what is used, for lack of a better word to define such difficulties.
@@requiredparticular6831 thank you for the Ted Talk on “accepted vernacular”, but just like no harm was meant when the diagnosis was first coined, when Derrick’s doctor used it, or when I repeated it.
I agree that Derrick showed no signs that he was as intellectually capable as Ana suggested. In an effort to move the conversation forward, I’d like to note that your comments about Derrick not being able to talk, walk or use the restroom highlight what Erica is saying. It is possible for someone to be as physically limited as Derrick, but have a high IQ. In Derrick‘s case he was both physically and intellectually limited.
@@sarahc9306 and it’s really unfortunate that Anna spent so much time faking what they were saying when she could have been helping him strengthen his sign language or any other means of communication that he WAS using. I love that his family was willing to try anything to improve his quality of life. It’s a stark contrast with what Anna was trying to do. She didn’t give a damn about Derrick’s quality of life. She wanted her FC poster boy. Her malignant narcissism led her to tell his mom that they were the most important people in each other’s lives when she had a husband and kids and he had a mom and brother who have taken care of him his whole life. Derrick was the most important to her because she was able to play house with him and pretend he was some sort of savant who just magically liked everything she did. She’s disgusting
Strangely enough, the CF machine only seemed to work when Stubblefield was 'assisting' Derrick's hand. Derrick is very close to his brother, so the idea that his presence could somehow have an adverse effect on how effectively the machine worked, is, to say the least highly questionable.
The documentary was about Derricks personal disabilities and not talking about the broad spectrum of how CP affects people. Derricks mother said he was a little 'off' from birth, and he had a few strokes when he was a toddler. It wasnt necessarily his CP but he also has major mental setbacks from his strokes as well. If he was so intellectually abled that hes writing essays about the black disabled experience -- then he would most CERTAINLY be able to articulate better even just pointing at things around the house or making sounds. Like for example, when the mother explains how Anna told the familly that Derrick and her were 'in love' and the mother told her to get out of the house and there was an argument. If Derrick was really THERE (as in he was actually in love with this woman and made plans to move in with her like Anna said he did) he would have had an outburst of his own right? Wouldnt he be mad at his mother or upset that Anna had to leave and he wasnt being respected as an adult? There was no mention of how Derrick reacted to the situation so Im guessing he had no reaction to it. Hes not locked behind his disability, he can walk and vocalize, he can point to things and dance to music. Its not like hes a vegetable and cant move or express himself. Hes intelligent but as far as consent I dont think his maturity level rises to that level whatsoever. She took advantage of him
It’s also problematic that Stubblefield went out of her way to play as having disabilities when she was young. It’s one thing to support those who have disabilities, and even to pretend for a day in order to understand perspective, but her behavior was that of one who who seems to have been lacking of attention from her mother who worked with people with disabilities. That doesn’t make her a bad person, but her lack of insight and boundaries led her to do things that are beyond unacceptable, as they led her to target someone else who has a disability.
For me she crossed a professional and ethical boundary, the power imbalance really bothered me first. Your commentary really fills gaps in the documentary. Thank you, this documentary has really bothered me
Let me be clear, i only write this because i, from the bottom of my heart, think that you DO NOT want to be the cause of someone elses harm, and your video gives a lot of predatory people a vessel to rationalise their malicioua intends. I think you are very very one sided in your own opinion, even moreso than the documentary you bash for exactly that. You are right that one of the main reasons for it being morally wrong i is the teacher-student power imbalance BUT it is now proven beyond reasonable doubt that faciliated communication DOES NOT WORK. Unfortunately. Derriks family wanted this to work desperately, they wanted to be able to communicate with him, him being able to do things grown ups do. You view this situation far too 'one sice fits all' and 'all' being you. YOU are you and being disabled, does not give you enough of an inside view in derriks case to make the statements you are making. Science will hopefully soon find a way for people like derrik, but for now protecting them from harm is the best we can do and you are potentially giving someone the thumbs up that they are looking for. Please re-think. Thank you for reading (please forgive me my grammar, i am not a native english speaker) and take care!
i agree with you 100% that derrick's and other disabled people's perspectives were missing, and the documentary perpertuates harmful ableist stereotypes. that being said, what is your opinion on facilitated communication and its scientifical validity? because that's the main point for me. like, if she's using a debunked, unreliable method of communication, that immediately puts into question if it was consensual, regardless of whether he is capable of consent or not
I don’t see it as a “mental age” thing, but an inability to communicate for one’s self to the world at large. He may know what an object is, for all any of us know, but if he can’t even nonverbally indicate the object when asked to point it out, who is Stubnlefield to decide she knows what he wants and likes? She had to do more than support his elbow, but close his fist and keep his index finger out to even hit a button. She was incredibly disrespectful to his family’s culture to insist that his mom change the radio. It’s her car and she, as the driver has to be in a good headspace. I think “mental age” is problematic, but hopefully with more voices like yours, we will get to a better way to define differences in abilities.
Hi Erica, I appreciate your perspective on the issue. I just finished this documentary. I don't have cerebral palsy, but I have autism and I am moderately functional and require people to help me in my day to day life and some more significant help in other aspects of my life, as well. I agree with what you said about IQ, too. There are people with disabilities deemed "high IQ" and verbal, but require significant help in their lives, just like those deemed "low IQ" and nonverbal or minimally verbal. I think the documentary should have pushed more about how the relationship was inherently wrong because she was his teacher and she breached a huge ethical and moral boundary. She took advantage of him mainly due to that, but they tried to stress it entirely was due to his limited "mental age". I thought the same thing you did about someone having good and bad days with wanting to talk (in any capacity like via a device or anything else) and I wish they had gone further into Derrick's life. I was confused because at one point it sounded like they said he was able to write an essay with a completely different aide who was with him in class and Anna wasn't there. I'm not sure if I understood that part correctly or if I got confused. Either way, it was mainly wrong because of the power dynamic, rather than his disability in and of itself.
If Derrick had the profound insight to write essays, you don’t think he would’ve communicated his BASIC needs like going to the bathroom? He didn’t just have cerebral palsy. He had had strokes as well. There’s no evidence that was communicating and it couldn’t be replicated.
@@EricaMonesdid you overlook his additional diagnosis of mental re*ardation? I know people don’t like the word, but it was a legitimate diagnosis with a legitimate definition. I’m saying that from my biological and medical experience. His mental and cognitive development was severely delayed and that had been proven far before Anna entered the picture.
There are many people with average or high IQs, who don’t have complete control over their bladders. Or can’t feel when their bladder is fall due to physical limitations. In Derrick’s case there are many more signs that he does not have the cognitive capacity to consent to a physical relationship. For example, a speech therapist may use eye gaze where someone looks up for yes and down for no or at a transparent sheet with icons. The fact that the family was looking for communication methods and none were effective indicate Derrick was not cognitively able to use them.
8:20 You hit the nail right on the head with that point: regardless of consent, a facilitator seeking a romantic relationship with their typer is unprofessional and a conflict of interest to say the least. I am a special education teacher specifically in the field of facilitated communications, so while your professor hit on many great points in the field, the fact you just brought up trumps everything.
Thanks for making this video! …I didn’t watch the doc but I read an article about the case… In 1999, I was doing my first co-op/ work semester. I worked with a man who had CP and I was told that he used FC on a board, so I was taught to use it. To be fair, I think that I was also told that it was a controversial method of support, so I mainly asked him questions and waited for a nod or a grumpy moan to communicate. I had been a preschool teacher before returning to school and had also spent my whole life with undiagnosed ADHD. I knew from working with precocious young children and my own wildly uneven functioning that his disability didn’t necessarily affect his cognitive abilities. He was smart, if not bored and depressed: he would eat unexpected food combinations and put his hands under himself while toileting. At the same time, though, his way of watching TV was complex: he wanted me to watch him watch shows, so he would regularly look over his shoulder to confirm that I was watching him and the TV but if I showed too much interest in the show he would change the channel. Just diabolical! 😂 When I met his mom during one of my work shifts I described what I had observed, and he gave an emphatically hard nod and loud grunt. 😌 During my stint, he would (lightly) hit himself on the head or throw his corrective braces to show that he was pissed off when I made self-care requests (‘please put your dishes in the sink’) and I would remind him of what he needed to do in order for us to go places, pointing out that I would get paid whether I sat watching his cable or we did something more fun, like people watch downtown or to the movies. I respected him as an adult and he seemed to enjoy it; he would get up 30 minutes early on my shifts if he heard my voice- so shrewd! I also agree that IQ tests are a poor way of identifying someone’s intelligence; all they really show is your level of assimilation to formal education. I also agree that people with intellectual disabilities can give consent to s3xual relationships; I just hope that, as with all people, those who are around the person are observant and supportive. 🙏🏾
Just curious; what is your opinion on facilitated communication? I see your point entirely here but personally as an autistic person it seems like Stubblefield used this technique as a way to sexually assault him. The two of them indefinitely had a power imbalance. They showed Dereck was able to communicate using physical objects (touching the fridge to show he wants food) but they didn’t try to use (or at least disclose if they did) other forms of communication like an IPad with images of the things he wants to say.
They did use images though? The expert used images and spent 3 hours trying to see if Derrick could identify different images by asking him questions. But he couldn’t.
I think the example with the refrigerator is so important because it shows that Derrick really struggles with abstract concepts. There are many ways people with disabilities can demonstrate their intelligence if we are open to accepting them, but it seems that in Derrick’s case he had a severe intellectual disability and could not have indicated consent to Anna.
First, congratulations on your degree! Like you said, we really need to listen to people within the community because their insight is so valuable. I’m so thankful that your channel exists because I’ve heard some incredibly ableist comments regarding this story.
I agree that there is definitely an issue with the way we think about intellectual disability and sex, but the issue here to me is not really about his cognitive capacity but about his consent. The biggest issue is not even if he can consent but if he really did. FC has been debunked several times which is not to say that it has no capacity to work for some people, but Derek situation seems much more likely to be either an intentional or accidental distortion of his communication. What is disturbing about this case is the possibility that Anna fully believes Derek is communicating with her when really she is using her own bias to interpret things the way she wants.
Yes, I wish that we got more from Derrick’s perspective in the documentary or at least an attempt to communicate with him about what happened. However, Anna was wrong because of the power imbalance. I wouldn’t be surprised if she tries to have an inappropriate relationship with someone else in the future.
I'm a diasbled person who is also very into disability activism and I just wanna say thank you so much for your nuanced take on this. Way too many people are taking the documentary at face value and ignoring the giant flaws that both it and the court case/tial have. You touched on one of the main flaws that bugged me the most about the whole thing; the lack of perspective from disabled people themselves. As you said, there was only one perspective they got, which wasn't even Derrick's but from someone who was your professor. The whole documentary and court case/trial were just a bunch of abled people speculating about what happened based on assumptions, outdated ideas and information, and their biases. I really think they could've done more to AT LEAST try to get Derrick's perspective on what happened. The fact that they didn't even try AT ALL to see what he had to say despite the fact that he is allegedly the victim made me so upset that I was yelling at the tv. It made me feel like they don't even actually care about him or what may have happened to him, that they just think the idea that someone like him could have agency and could use it to express the desire for love and intimacy has to be impossible or absurd or something along those lines. Like that idea doesn't fit into their worldview of disabled people and so they had to reject it instead of facing the cognitive dissonance it causes head on so that their worldview can change for the better. No one cared about ableism (that word was never even used once during the documentary despite it being at the center of the whole situation, which is itself absolutely wild to me) or getting at the truth of what happened, they just wanted to uphold the status quo that society has built around how disabled people are viewed no matter how wrong or incomplete it is, no matter the harm it causes to disabled people. It also really bugged me that Derrick kept being infantilized by almost everyone and that it seemed like they couldn't imagine not doing that to him. Like you said when you were talking about the outdated concept of "mental age", disabled people are whatever age they are and that's that. Derrick is an adult. He may need assistance and have issues with verbal communication, but that doesn't make him stop being a grown man who will have normal grown man desires. Wanting to exercise autonomy is what adults (and children but that's a different discussion) do. In fact it's what they need on some level in order to be healthy, happy, and fulfilled. They have yet to internalize the fact that if they would be demoralized and depressed if their autonomy was constantly ignored or denied for their whole adult life, then so would literally anyone else, including disabled people! Anyways, thank you again for making this video. It was very nice to see an educated, nuanced take from someone else with a disability instead of from an abled person that doesn't know what they are talking about :)
Being disabled does not automatically make you the subject matter expert of this particular case. Full stop. Full and absolute stop. Every time cases like this come out everyone comes out of the woodwork as experts because they are disabled or they are this or that. The fact of the matter is THEY DID TRY TO GET HIM TO SPEAK FOR HIMSELF. But guess what? HE COULD NOT. They tried over and over. They tried with the machine, they tried with photos. HE WAS NOT ABLE TO COMMUNICATE. They DID TRY. That’s the whole issue with this case. Anna claimed he was having profound conversations but no one was able to capture him actually communicating on camera or under observation so that he could speak for himself. Making assumptions about what he “might” want IS the giant flaw here. For all we know he could be a gay man and hated his encounter with Anna. When will people accept that their personal story does not make them an expert on a totally different person who has totally different abilities. Btw there WAS a disabled person speaking throughout the ENTIRE documentary providing the disabled perspective.
@@spriestchump1531 exactly. Contrarians on this topic are not being logical. His family wanted for him to be able to communicate which is the whole reason they enlisted Anna for help to begin with. This isn’t a case of inhibiting a disabled man’s wants. This is a case of an able-bodied woman projecting her wants onto a young disabled man who was unable to consent. Furthermore if he never even learned the alphabet, how was he suddenly able to type long paragraphs without ever learning to spell or read?
@@OGWatchersinbushes exactly. I think the brother said it perfectly at the end of the documentary - he’s intellectually disabled, and that’s okay. Not everybody has to be some kind of secret genius. It’s crazy to see so many comments making the same mistake, wanting to get his detailed perspective on his sexual assault. How on earth is he going to explain anything about that?
If a man was “in love” and having sex with a nonverbal woman who wore diapers and couldn’t communicate her basic needs to her family, there would be no discussion or ambiguity about it. The whole world would be against him.
Gender definitely played a part in her sentencing. I don’t think the fact that he is non-verbal and wore diapers is the “proof” that he couldn’t consent. Steven Hawking had similar physical limitations. Derrick had a very supportive family but his teachers, family, and therapists all found his intellectual capacity to be quite low. There are many ways speech therapists can teach people with disabilities to communicate. One method is the use of switches (similar to the ones people have started using with pets). The switches can be controlled with someone’s hands, feet, elbow, head etc to make them as accessible as possible. People can have just one or two or the switches can be connected to iPads where the user can type in a word document. If Derrick had the intellectual capacity to communicate I think he would have been able to do more than point at the fridge (which is a very concrete association that most people with low intellectual capacity are able to do).
I had a brain injury and was trapped in my body for ten months before hyperbaric oxygen therapy cured me essentially overnight (might be worth a try for you?), anyhow, of course you're right. Props to you girl. Glad someone spoke on this. Can you imagine being treated like a baby!? Poor guy 😢
Idk man, I mean, if someone has the same comprehension as the average 5 year old, I would say they should not be pursued as romantic interests by people who understand the implications of that better than them
Help me with this. I do not pretend to be well educated on the topic of disability. I only have an associates degree in art I'll be honest, so you are by far more educated than me. I just finished the documentary and at the very end the mother says that Derrick masturbates now and that she has to give him medication. Is the problem that he is doing this at inappropriate times and places or is the problem just that he masturbates? Don't disabled people still have the right to orgasm like the rest of us? That bit at the very end threw me off to be honest. Idk. And like I said I do not pretend to know anything on the matter. Just as a person watching it seemed weird to me how she phrased it and her body language.
I think what the mom was trying to explain is that he had never experienced sexual gratification before and since Anna introduced him to that feeling, he has been attempting to replicate it on his own. She explained it as an itch he can’t scratch. Sounds like she’s saying that he tries to masturbate all the time but can never climax so his itch is never fulfilled. I believe the intent of the medication is to soothe his suffering in her eyes. Imagine becoming fixated on trying to climax and you can never reach one. That’s torture in my opinion.
Fantastic comment. When the mother had said this, my very first thought was- "Why can't he masturbate if he wants to? And why are you giving him medication (to stop it?) And is it just because he is doing it in front of people & in public?? So yeah, I had the exact same thoughts and questions as you did regarding this.
I think the issue is that, because he does not have motor control over his hands, he is incapable of bringing himself to orgasm- so it is frustrating for him and he keeps trying over and over without success. Like his mom said “an itch he can’t scratch.”
First I want to say congratulations on getting your degree hopefully you’ll accomplish many more things hi Erica, I think that no matter what we do, even if you are able to consent, there will always be these types of cases because it never occurs to able bodied people that ,someone with a mental or severely physically disabled disability could ever want or do these things I agree with everything you said in this video so don’t take this as disagreeing but also some people just don’t want to see these sort of relationships I asked myself these sorts of questions all the time. I just have a hard time explaining it sorry for the long-winded comment.
I’m sorry, you are being very irresponsible with this video. Facilitated communication has been thoroughly debunked, please look it up. They were not able to get D to repeat any of the things he supposedly said to the professor when working with other FC specialists. She was using him, and taking advantage of a disabled person- you say you study disability justice, you should know that disabled people are overwhelmingly victims of sxual assault.
I only decided to watch the documentary so I could watch your commentary on it. I really appreciate you so much for offering your opinions and insight, and I value you greatly as a resource.
Thank you for this! The commentary I’ve seen completely lacks nuance and feeds into ableist perspectives of intellectual capacity. I do feel like the woman was projecting a lot onto Dman (and it was a giant red flag that she wouldn’t call him by the name he told her he’d like to be called) and there’s a gross abuse of power on her part. I did also feel like Dman’s mother was deeply uncomfortable with him having any sort of sexuality and didn’t see him as a man
"Dman" was the name SHE gave to HIM. It was her doing the typing the whole time. It was one of the many manipulative tactics she used to get her claws into him, such as saying he liked classical music over gospel, preferred red wine over beer, and was a vegetarian. His brother and mother called him Derrick throughout the documentary.
I watched this documentary and found a startling lack of perspective on the side of the "victim". I honestly felt like it was a family that was failing to cope with his sexuality or even see him as a sexual being and Infantalalizing him. Thank you for your video.
How could they get the perspective from the victim, considering he is completely non-verbal? I really don't understand this?? What method would you have proposed to get Derrick's perspective in the documentary? Remember, he cannot even identify physical objects. He cannot do pre-school level tasks. He cannot point at a picture of a cat or a cup. I'm genuinely confused on how you want his perspective to be shared, aside from sharing the perspective of his carers.
OK, I went back and watched the movie and one thing that stood out to me was the entire movie they wanted to point out the brother and the mom that is as well as his aid how smart and intelligent, he was the brother and the mother didn’t think he was smart enough or intelligent enough to talk to him about sex. I do agree that his aid should not have mixed work with the relationship and she should have finalized the divorce with her husband first before pursuing. I also believe that the mother and the brother know him so well they should’ve allowed her over to the house with their supervision and saw how he reacted, and based the situation off of that, I understand that it is hard for him to communicate, but all three of them knew him well enough where they could’ve figured it out but then with the way the Mom is, I feel like even if he could verbally say yes, or no she would’ve found a way to end the relationship because that’s her baby. and that’s really all she saw him as.
@@karidowns yes your right I realize a few days after posting the comments it did not sound right. I tried to edit the comments, but for some reason, I could not do it on my iPad. Don’t get me wrong after watching the documentary a few more times after this I agree that she SA him should have gotten 24 year prison I just know there are those parents and the mom strikes me as one of those parents, even if he was fully mentally confident, and he could understand she would not allow him to be in a sexual relationship I also think the mother and the brother could’ve done a lot more to prevent this from happening in the first place,
Yep. Both parties were actually abusing him. The way the mom was so focused on words MY,MINE, I KNOW, when talking about her son...and the way they mostly went on and on about degrading the family, and not so much abou Derrick. This woman's whole identity was developed around being a caretaker and a mom. Anna and mom are actually very similar. Manipulative and selfish.
@allieaudio9965 The mother was not abusive. She is the sole caregiver who is responsible for a man who has the mentality of 6 month old. Going into mama bear mode and claiming a child is common with mothers, especially when abuse is present.
@thecapableplanet7885 I agree that the brother and mother could have done more to prevent this from happening. I believe they both wanted the process to work. From the mother's standpoint, I felt she saw it as a relief from being so hands-on as his sole caregiver. Once things took a turn, she went into mama bear mode.
Thank you for sharing your perspective! It is much needed with all of the dominant abelist discourse flying around. Derrick / Dman is just made a victim, with no agency. That whole 'mental age' thing is bs, as you called it. Keep up the good work ♥️✨
@ericamones I have 2 sincere questions how could the documentary have attempted to get Derek‘s perspective on the matter given his limited ability to communicate my second question is although I do think people who are disabled, can have consensual relationships in the case of Derek, who has such a limited ability to communicate how would assess if he is actually giving consent or not?
Can I just say that I am so proud that I have just accepted a temporary position with CUNY (Staten Island) precisely because they attract students just like Erica. I cannot wait to work for them.
I agree with you and I think this synopsis of the documentary will start a conversation that needs to be had. Disabled people should not be cut off from the sexual part of life.
@@blastlachy2802 Disabled people with the mental capacity of an infant can't discuss sex. Derrick CAN'T discuss sex. We don't need to have a conversation about that. It's common sense.
I think youve misunderstood the concept of mental age. No one (or atleast people who understand the concept) is saying that someone who is 30, are actually 9. What they are saying is someone who is 30 may only score on a standardised assessment on the same level as people who are 9. E.g. your ability to think about abstract concepts is on par with a 9 year old. Also with IQ, there are several sections, you can get a partial iq score based on a specific cognition if you can complete it. If you cannot complete an iq because you cannot talk, that doesnt mean you get a low IQ. You just dont have an IQ score at all because it cant be measured this way, and cognitions maybe tested in other ways. I do completely agree that more people with lived experiences should have been on it. There have been people who both found benefits of people with this, but also people who experienced unwanted sexual contact under the guise of empowerment. Showing these perspectives would be good.
Commenting again to emphasize that your advice at the end is EXTREMELY apt. I could sense just from watching the documentary that I will have to be very selective about who’s opinions on it I’m going to pay attention to. The general public is so painfully ignorant to the nuances of both disabled people and sexuality (never mind disabled people’s sexuality) and I just know my heart can’t take the kind of shit people are saying about it.
@olhydra from what I can tell Erica only disabled UA-camr speaking on this, I haven’t been able to find anyone else and don’t get me wrong if Anna did do these things to this man and he wasn’t able to consent, she needs to be thrown under the jail they also know there are people that are just like this guy with similar physical limitations who are nonverbal but use devices such as iPad and things to communicate, but even in a situation like that if somebody consented, I still think the general public would somehow say they weren’t able to consent because they couldn’t physically verbalize. It was a mouse if you get my point.
As a brother of a mentally challenge sibling, this video is an excellent display of why 1) Having a physical disability makes you in no way what so ever more understanding of what mental disability is than any other physical state. Physical and mental disability are two different things. 2) Crip theory is nothing else than another university sect based on people whos need to compensate for their inferiority complex exist at the cost of their common sense. Mentally disabled people and their families need real care and it needs to not be based in these kind of cult practices.
@@EricaMones The point of your video is that you dont understand that severely mentally challenge people are really mentally challenged. Because you think that on one hand everyone should be treated with equal respect regardless of ability but on the other hand you really want severely mentally handicapped people to not be mentally handicapped at all. You want to be really tolerant but you prefer that somewhere deep inside the people who are to be tolerated for their differences, there is someone just like you, who can think and conseptualize things. You are wrong. Inside of mentally challenged people, there are no non-mentally challenged people trying to get out. They are exactly what they look like. If you are truly so tolerant and accepting, start off with accepting that. Inside of D-man, there is no misunderstood intellectual who wants to get out. Inside of all these kids who have been dragged to one well paid charlatan or the other to have their hands held to typewriters to write nonsense their desperate parents want to hear and keep paying for, there wan never ever a child who wanted to write those things. There was never anyone like you in there. There was never anyone their parents hoped would be there inside of them. Stop projecting yourself on these humans. They are truly different than you.
@@EricaMones Accept that there are people who are not like you. Not at all. Not on the inside, not on the outside. There is noone like you deep deep inside of them who wants to get out. Acceps that and then call yourself tolerant and accepting.
@@EricaMones Yes you do. You wanna be tolerant and give everyone the same rights but you also cant let go of the Idea that they must, deep inside, be the same as you are. If you truly want to be for the same rights for everybody then you must accept that there are people who are not like you and giving them rights will mean something truly different than rights for you and others like you. My family was destroyed because we live in a country that wants to treat people like my sibling like "everybody else" when that had nothing to do with what my sibling needed. I know what happens when your type of erroneous perspective gets power. Those who suffer the most are those who are truly different and can not speak and then everyone around them.
I appreciate your contribution on this, but I disagree on a few points. You have to remember his mother and brother have been looking for ways to get Derrick to communicate beyond the sign language that he’d been using. That’s why John approached Anna in the first place. People act like they didn’t want him to have independence when the truth is because of his conditions he cannot. Yes, there are many people with CP who have no mental barriers. Derrick is not one of them. He was diagnosed as non verbal with severe mental re+ardation by several doctors. His family desperately wanted Facilitated Communication to work for him. They wanted him to be able to express himself. He was not able. It was all Anna. If he was able to communicate his love for red wine over beer, why didn’t he ever communicate that he had to use the restroom? Why didn’t he write that he was hungry instead of banging on the refrigerator? Why did he never communicate that he had a bad dream, had an itch, that he wanted to do a particular activity? The truth is Anna Stubblefield took advantage of a disabled man who could not consent. She got off easy and I wish she was under the jail instead of giving interviews about the man that she raped. I do agree that people with disabilities are often infantilized, but in this case, with a non-verbal man who wore diapers and could barely walk on his own, this treatment was justified. Anna Stubblefield is a manipulative rapist, end of story. The whys don’t matter.
Very well said! The fact that Anna preyed on the hopes of this family and raped Derrick, she deserves to be locked up forever, IMO.
I agree on many aspects, but while it might have been known as severe mental retardation in the past and even when he was first diagnosed, for all I know, that term is no longer used or acceptable. Intellectual disability is what is used, for lack of a better word to define such difficulties.
@@requiredparticular6831 thank you for the Ted Talk on “accepted vernacular”, but just like no harm was meant when the diagnosis was first coined, when Derrick’s doctor used it, or when I repeated it.
I agree that Derrick showed no signs that he was as intellectually capable as Ana suggested. In an effort to move the conversation forward, I’d like to note that your comments about Derrick not being able to talk, walk or use the restroom highlight what Erica is saying. It is possible for someone to be as physically limited as Derrick, but have a high IQ. In Derrick‘s case he was both physically and intellectually limited.
@@sarahc9306 and it’s really unfortunate that Anna spent so much time faking what they were saying when she could have been helping him strengthen his sign language or any other means of communication that he WAS using. I love that his family was willing to try anything to improve his quality of life. It’s a stark contrast with what Anna was trying to do. She didn’t give a damn about Derrick’s quality of life. She wanted her FC poster boy. Her malignant narcissism led her to tell his mom that they were the most important people in each other’s lives when she had a husband and kids and he had a mom and brother who have taken care of him his whole life. Derrick was the most important to her because she was able to play house with him and pretend he was some sort of savant who just magically liked everything she did. She’s disgusting
Strangely enough, the CF machine only seemed to work when Stubblefield was 'assisting' Derrick's hand. Derrick is very close to his brother, so the idea that his presence could somehow have an adverse effect on how effectively the machine worked, is, to say the least highly questionable.
@@patriciaclarke-g1i what about the one aide who did it too?
@@EricaMones the aide was a student of Ana‘s. I would like to hear more from her because it seems like she was doing what her professor wanted.
@@sarahc9306 Commiting a perjury for her teacher? I don't think anyone would go that far.
I would have love to see them interact in court or something
@@allieaudio9965 did she testify in court? I don’t think she did but please correct me if I’m misremembering. If not, her claims wouldn’t be perjury
The documentary was about Derricks personal disabilities and not talking about the broad spectrum of how CP affects people. Derricks mother said he was a little 'off' from birth, and he had a few strokes when he was a toddler. It wasnt necessarily his CP but he also has major mental setbacks from his strokes as well. If he was so intellectually abled that hes writing essays about the black disabled experience -- then he would most CERTAINLY be able to articulate better even just pointing at things around the house or making sounds. Like for example, when the mother explains how Anna told the familly that Derrick and her were 'in love' and the mother told her to get out of the house and there was an argument. If Derrick was really THERE (as in he was actually in love with this woman and made plans to move in with her like Anna said he did) he would have had an outburst of his own right? Wouldnt he be mad at his mother or upset that Anna had to leave and he wasnt being respected as an adult? There was no mention of how Derrick reacted to the situation so Im guessing he had no reaction to it. Hes not locked behind his disability, he can walk and vocalize, he can point to things and dance to music. Its not like hes a vegetable and cant move or express himself. Hes intelligent but as far as consent I dont think his maturity level rises to that level whatsoever. She took advantage of him
It’s also problematic that Stubblefield went out of her way to play as having disabilities when she was young. It’s one thing to support those who have disabilities, and even to pretend for a day in order to understand perspective, but her behavior was that of one who who seems to have been lacking of attention from her mother who worked with people with disabilities. That doesn’t make her a bad person, but her lack of insight and boundaries led her to do things that are beyond unacceptable, as they led her to target someone else who has a disability.
For me she crossed a professional and ethical boundary, the power imbalance really bothered me first.
Your commentary really fills gaps in the documentary. Thank you, this documentary has really bothered me
Let me be clear, i only write this because i, from the bottom of my heart, think that you DO NOT want to be the cause of someone elses harm, and your video gives a lot of predatory people a vessel to rationalise their malicioua intends. I think you are very very one sided in your own opinion, even moreso than the documentary you bash for exactly that. You are right that one of the main reasons for it being morally wrong i is the teacher-student power imbalance BUT it is now proven beyond reasonable doubt that faciliated communication DOES NOT WORK. Unfortunately. Derriks family wanted this to work desperately, they wanted to be able to communicate with him, him being able to do things grown ups do. You view this situation far too 'one sice fits all' and 'all' being you. YOU are you and being disabled, does not give you enough of an inside view in derriks case to make the statements you are making. Science will hopefully soon find a way for people like derrik, but for now protecting them from harm is the best we can do and you are potentially giving someone the thumbs up that they are looking for. Please re-think.
Thank you for reading (please forgive me my grammar, i am not a native english speaker) and take care!
i agree with you 100% that derrick's and other disabled people's perspectives were missing, and the documentary perpertuates harmful ableist stereotypes.
that being said, what is your opinion on facilitated communication and its scientifical validity? because that's the main point for me. like, if she's using a debunked, unreliable method of communication, that immediately puts into question if it was consensual, regardless of whether he is capable of consent or not
I don’t see it as a “mental age” thing, but an inability to communicate for one’s self to the world at large. He may know what an object is, for all any of us know, but if he can’t even nonverbally indicate the object when asked to point it out, who is Stubnlefield to decide she knows what he wants and likes? She had to do more than support his elbow, but close his fist and keep his index finger out to even hit a button. She was incredibly disrespectful to his family’s culture to insist that his mom change the radio. It’s her car and she, as the driver has to be in a good headspace. I think “mental age” is problematic, but hopefully with more voices like yours, we will get to a better way to define differences in abilities.
Hi Erica, I appreciate your perspective on the issue. I just finished this documentary. I don't have cerebral palsy, but I have autism and I am moderately functional and require people to help me in my day to day life and some more significant help in other aspects of my life, as well. I agree with what you said about IQ, too. There are people with disabilities deemed "high IQ" and verbal, but require significant help in their lives, just like those deemed "low IQ" and nonverbal or minimally verbal.
I think the documentary should have pushed more about how the relationship was inherently wrong because she was his teacher and she breached a huge ethical and moral boundary. She took advantage of him mainly due to that, but they tried to stress it entirely was due to his limited "mental age".
I thought the same thing you did about someone having good and bad days with wanting to talk (in any capacity like via a device or anything else) and I wish they had gone further into Derrick's life. I was confused because at one point it sounded like they said he was able to write an essay with a completely different aide who was with him in class and Anna wasn't there. I'm not sure if I understood that part correctly or if I got confused.
Either way, it was mainly wrong because of the power dynamic, rather than his disability in and of itself.
If Derrick had the profound insight to write essays, you don’t think he would’ve communicated his BASIC needs like going to the bathroom? He didn’t just have cerebral palsy. He had had strokes as well. There’s no evidence that was communicating and it couldn’t be replicated.
@@bigmona2741 cerebral palsy is often caused by strokes. Also incontinence is common in CP and has nothing to do with one’s competence.
@@EricaMonesdid you overlook his additional diagnosis of mental re*ardation? I know people don’t like the word, but it was a legitimate diagnosis with a legitimate definition. I’m saying that from my biological and medical experience. His mental and cognitive development was severely delayed and that had been proven far before Anna entered the picture.
@@EricaMonesI never said incontinence had anything to do with mental competence. You’re intentionally misinterpreting what I commented.
There are many people with average or high IQs, who don’t have complete control over their bladders. Or can’t feel when their bladder is fall due to physical limitations. In Derrick’s case there are many more signs that he does not have the cognitive capacity to consent to a physical relationship. For example, a speech therapist may use eye gaze where someone looks up for yes and down for no or at a transparent sheet with icons. The fact that the family was looking for communication methods and none were effective indicate Derrick was not cognitively able to use them.
8:20 You hit the nail right on the head with that point: regardless of consent, a facilitator seeking a romantic relationship with their typer is unprofessional and a conflict of interest to say the least. I am a special education teacher specifically in the field of facilitated communications, so while your professor hit on many great points in the field, the fact you just brought up trumps everything.
Thanks for making this video! …I didn’t watch the doc but I read an article about the case… In 1999, I was doing my first co-op/ work semester. I worked with a man who had CP and I was told that he used FC on a board, so I was taught to use it. To be fair, I think that I was also told that it was a controversial method of support, so I mainly asked him questions and waited for a nod or a grumpy moan to communicate. I had been a preschool teacher before returning to school and had also spent my whole life with undiagnosed ADHD. I knew from working with precocious young children and my own wildly uneven functioning that his disability didn’t necessarily affect his cognitive abilities. He was smart, if not bored and depressed: he would eat unexpected food combinations and put his hands under himself while toileting. At the same time, though, his way of watching TV was complex: he wanted me to watch him watch shows, so he would regularly look over his shoulder to confirm that I was watching him and the TV but if I showed too much interest in the show he would change the channel. Just diabolical! 😂 When I met his mom during one of my work shifts I described what I had observed, and he gave an emphatically hard nod and loud grunt. 😌 During my stint, he would (lightly) hit himself on the head or throw his corrective braces to show that he was pissed off when I made self-care requests (‘please put your dishes in the sink’) and I would remind him of what he needed to do in order for us to go places, pointing out that I would get paid whether I sat watching his cable or we did something more fun, like people watch downtown or to the movies. I respected him as an adult and he seemed to enjoy it; he would get up 30 minutes early on my shifts if he heard my voice- so shrewd! I also agree that IQ tests are a poor way of identifying someone’s intelligence; all they really show is your level of assimilation to formal education. I also agree that people with intellectual disabilities can give consent to s3xual relationships; I just hope that, as with all people, those who are around the person are observant and supportive. 🙏🏾
Just curious; what is your opinion on facilitated communication? I see your point entirely here but personally as an autistic person it seems like Stubblefield used this technique as a way to sexually assault him. The two of them indefinitely had a power imbalance. They showed Dereck was able to communicate using physical objects (touching the fridge to show he wants food) but they didn’t try to use (or at least disclose if they did) other forms of communication like an IPad with images of the things he wants to say.
They did use images though? The expert used images and spent 3 hours trying to see if Derrick could identify different images by asking him questions. But he couldn’t.
@@spriestchump1531 that’s true, I forgot that they proved he more or less couldn’t identify an object unless the physical object was in front of him
I think the example with the refrigerator is so important because it shows that Derrick really struggles with abstract concepts. There are many ways people with disabilities can demonstrate their intelligence if we are open to accepting them, but it seems that in Derrick’s case he had a severe intellectual disability and could not have indicated consent to Anna.
First, congratulations on your degree! Like you said, we really need to listen to people within the community because their insight is so valuable. I’m so thankful that your channel exists because I’ve heard some incredibly ableist comments regarding this story.
I agree that there is definitely an issue with the way we think about intellectual disability and sex, but the issue here to me is not really about his cognitive capacity but about his consent. The biggest issue is not even if he can consent but if he really did. FC has been debunked several times which is not to say that it has no capacity to work for some people, but Derek situation seems much more likely to be either an intentional or accidental distortion of his communication. What is disturbing about this case is the possibility that Anna fully believes Derek is communicating with her when really she is using her own bias to interpret things the way she wants.
Saying someone has the same capacity as a 5 year old is not the same as saying someone is mentally 5 years old, or IS 5 years old as you put it.
@@juliegrace8473 there still is no way to prove it, which is my point.
Yes, I wish that we got more from Derrick’s perspective in the documentary or at least an attempt to communicate with him about what happened. However, Anna was wrong because of the power imbalance. I wouldn’t be surprised if she tries to have an inappropriate relationship with someone else in the future.
He’s completely non verbal, how do you propose they would get Derrick’s perspective on his sexual assault?
HOW THE FCK WOULD YOU GET HIS PERSPECTIVE????
I'm a diasbled person who is also very into disability activism and I just wanna say thank you so much for your nuanced take on this. Way too many people are taking the documentary at face value and ignoring the giant flaws that both it and the court case/tial have. You touched on one of the main flaws that bugged me the most about the whole thing; the lack of perspective from disabled people themselves. As you said, there was only one perspective they got, which wasn't even Derrick's but from someone who was your professor. The whole documentary and court case/trial were just a bunch of abled people speculating about what happened based on assumptions, outdated ideas and information, and their biases.
I really think they could've done more to AT LEAST try to get Derrick's perspective on what happened. The fact that they didn't even try AT ALL to see what he had to say despite the fact that he is allegedly the victim made me so upset that I was yelling at the tv. It made me feel like they don't even actually care about him or what may have happened to him, that they just think the idea that someone like him could have agency and could use it to express the desire for love and intimacy has to be impossible or absurd or something along those lines. Like that idea doesn't fit into their worldview of disabled people and so they had to reject it instead of facing the cognitive dissonance it causes head on so that their worldview can change for the better. No one cared about ableism (that word was never even used once during the documentary despite it being at the center of the whole situation, which is itself absolutely wild to me) or getting at the truth of what happened, they just wanted to uphold the status quo that society has built around how disabled people are viewed no matter how wrong or incomplete it is, no matter the harm it causes to disabled people.
It also really bugged me that Derrick kept being infantilized by almost everyone and that it seemed like they couldn't imagine not doing that to him. Like you said when you were talking about the outdated concept of "mental age", disabled people are whatever age they are and that's that. Derrick is an adult. He may need assistance and have issues with verbal communication, but that doesn't make him stop being a grown man who will have normal grown man desires. Wanting to exercise autonomy is what adults (and children but that's a different discussion) do. In fact it's what they need on some level in order to be healthy, happy, and fulfilled. They have yet to internalize the fact that if they would be demoralized and depressed if their autonomy was constantly ignored or denied for their whole adult life, then so would literally anyone else, including disabled people!
Anyways, thank you again for making this video. It was very nice to see an educated, nuanced take from someone else with a disability instead of from an abled person that doesn't know what they are talking about :)
Being disabled does not automatically make you the subject matter expert of this particular case. Full stop. Full and absolute stop. Every time cases like this come out everyone comes out of the woodwork as experts because they are disabled or they are this or that.
The fact of the matter is THEY DID TRY TO GET HIM TO SPEAK FOR HIMSELF. But guess what? HE COULD NOT. They tried over and over. They tried with the machine, they tried with photos. HE WAS NOT ABLE TO COMMUNICATE. They DID TRY. That’s the whole issue with this case. Anna claimed he was having profound conversations but no one was able to capture him actually communicating on camera or under observation so that he could speak for himself. Making assumptions about what he “might” want IS the giant flaw here. For all we know he could be a gay man and hated his encounter with Anna.
When will people accept that their personal story does not make them an expert on a totally different person who has totally different abilities. Btw there WAS a disabled person speaking throughout the ENTIRE documentary providing the disabled perspective.
Considering he couldn’t even identify a cat from a cup, how do you think they could get his perspective on this? Genuinely curious what your idea is
@@spriestchump1531 exactly. Contrarians on this topic are not being logical. His family wanted for him to be able to communicate which is the whole reason they enlisted Anna for help to begin with. This isn’t a case of inhibiting a disabled man’s wants. This is a case of an able-bodied woman projecting her wants onto a young disabled man who was unable to consent.
Furthermore if he never even learned the alphabet, how was he suddenly able to type long paragraphs without ever learning to spell or read?
@@OGWatchersinbushes exactly. I think the brother said it perfectly at the end of the documentary - he’s intellectually disabled, and that’s okay. Not everybody has to be some kind of secret genius. It’s crazy to see so many comments making the same mistake, wanting to get his detailed perspective on his sexual assault. How on earth is he going to explain anything about that?
you nailed it brother
New subscriber!!! Thanks for making this, I hope more people in the disability community speak out on this too. 🙌🙌
If a man was “in love” and having sex with a nonverbal woman who wore diapers and couldn’t communicate her basic needs to her family, there would be no discussion or ambiguity about it. The whole world would be against him.
@@bigmona2741 Maybe other people would.
@@EricaMones????
Gender definitely played a part in her sentencing. I don’t think the fact that he is non-verbal and wore diapers is the “proof” that he couldn’t consent. Steven Hawking had similar physical limitations. Derrick had a very supportive family but his teachers, family, and therapists all found his intellectual capacity to be quite low. There are many ways speech therapists can teach people with disabilities to communicate. One method is the use of switches (similar to the ones people have started using with pets). The switches can be controlled with someone’s hands, feet, elbow, head etc to make them as accessible as possible. People can have just one or two or the switches can be connected to iPads where the user can type in a word document. If Derrick had the intellectual capacity to communicate I think he would have been able to do more than point at the fridge (which is a very concrete association that most people with low intellectual capacity are able to do).
I thought this was going to be about those disabled dating shows like "love on the spectrum" and most recently "down for love"
I had a brain injury and was trapped in my body for ten months before hyperbaric oxygen therapy cured me essentially overnight (might be worth a try for you?), anyhow, of course you're right. Props to you girl. Glad someone spoke on this. Can you imagine being treated like a baby!? Poor guy 😢
Wow. Your perspective on the film is so needed. Thank you
Idk man, I mean, if someone has the same comprehension as the average 5 year old, I would say they should not be pursued as romantic interests by people who understand the implications of that better than them
Help me with this. I do not pretend to be well educated on the topic of disability. I only have an associates degree in art I'll be honest, so you are by far more educated than me.
I just finished the documentary and at the very end the mother says that Derrick masturbates now and that she has to give him medication. Is the problem that he is doing this at inappropriate times and places or is the problem just that he masturbates? Don't disabled people still have the right to orgasm like the rest of us? That bit at the very end threw me off to be honest. Idk. And like I said I do not pretend to know anything on the matter. Just as a person watching it seemed weird to me how she phrased it and her body language.
I think what the mom was trying to explain is that he had never experienced sexual gratification before and since Anna introduced him to that feeling, he has been attempting to replicate it on his own. She explained it as an itch he can’t scratch. Sounds like she’s saying that he tries to masturbate all the time but can never climax so his itch is never fulfilled. I believe the intent of the medication is to soothe his suffering in her eyes. Imagine becoming fixated on trying to climax and you can never reach one. That’s torture in my opinion.
Fantastic comment. When the mother had said this, my very first thought was- "Why can't he masturbate if he wants to? And why are you giving him medication (to stop it?) And is it just because he is doing it in front of people & in public?? So yeah, I had the exact same thoughts and questions as you did regarding this.
I think the issue is that, because he does not have motor control over his hands, he is incapable of bringing himself to orgasm- so it is frustrating for him and he keeps trying over and over without success. Like his mom said “an itch he can’t scratch.”
@@jmathiason thank you, that makes total sense
@@jmathiasonI didn’t know this part 😭😭this truly breaks my heart and the monster who did this is still out…
First I want to say congratulations on getting your degree hopefully you’ll accomplish many more things hi Erica, I think that no matter what we do, even if you are able to consent, there will always be these types of cases because it never occurs to able bodied people that ,someone with a mental or severely physically disabled disability could ever want or do these things I agree with everything you said in this video so don’t take this as disagreeing but also some people just don’t want to see these sort of relationships I asked myself these sorts of questions all the time. I just have a hard time explaining it sorry for the long-winded comment.
I’m sorry, you are being very irresponsible with this video. Facilitated communication has been thoroughly debunked, please look it up. They were not able to get D to repeat any of the things he supposedly said to the professor when working with other FC specialists. She was using him, and taking advantage of a disabled person- you say you study disability justice, you should know that disabled people are overwhelmingly victims of sxual assault.
@@palpitations00 I mentioned those facts in the video…
@@EricaMonesan still, you choose to make the video they way you did. Congrats, not
I only decided to watch the documentary so I could watch your commentary on it. I really appreciate you so much for offering your opinions and insight, and I value you greatly as a resource.
Are you questioning every psychiatrist, every clinical psychologist and doctor that assessed Derrick as being aged 6-12 months old mentally?
@@poerava there is no definitive test, so yes.
Thank you for this! The commentary I’ve seen completely lacks nuance and feeds into ableist perspectives of intellectual capacity. I do feel like the woman was projecting a lot onto Dman (and it was a giant red flag that she wouldn’t call him by the name he told her he’d like to be called) and there’s a gross abuse of power on her part. I did also feel like Dman’s mother was deeply uncomfortable with him having any sort of sexuality and didn’t see him as a man
"Dman" was the name SHE gave to HIM. It was her doing the typing the whole time. It was one of the many manipulative tactics she used to get her claws into him, such as saying he liked classical music over gospel, preferred red wine over beer, and was a vegetarian. His brother and mother called him Derrick throughout the documentary.
His name is Derrick. Not Dman. His abuser and her mother consistently used that name, that is not his name.
Thank you for this. I've avoided the doc and discourse knowing they'd be a n ableist car crash. So damaging and painful.
Having cerebral palsy doesn't automatically make you the authority on this topic. Every patient is different.
@@heyula07 people not patients. Also I was very clear that everyone person is different. I also have a Masters in disability studies.
I watched this documentary and found a startling lack of perspective on the side of the "victim". I honestly felt like it was a family that was failing to cope with his sexuality or even see him as a sexual being and Infantalalizing him.
Thank you for your video.
How could they get the perspective from the victim, considering he is completely non-verbal? I really don't understand this??
What method would you have proposed to get Derrick's perspective in the documentary? Remember, he cannot even identify physical objects. He cannot do pre-school level tasks. He cannot point at a picture of a cat or a cup. I'm genuinely confused on how you want his perspective to be shared, aside from sharing the perspective of his carers.
How tf could they get his perspective?? All of you are eager to point that out bit NOT A SINGLE ONE of you can answer that question.
OK, I went back and watched the movie and one thing that stood out to me was the entire movie they wanted to point out the brother and the mom that is as well as his aid how smart and intelligent, he was the brother and the mother didn’t think he was smart enough or intelligent enough to talk to him about sex. I do agree that his aid should not have mixed work with the relationship and she should have finalized the divorce with her husband first before pursuing. I also believe that the mother and the brother know him so well they should’ve allowed her over to the house with their supervision and saw how he reacted, and based the situation off of that, I understand that it is hard for him to communicate, but all three of them knew him well enough where they could’ve figured it out but then with the way the Mom is, I feel like even if he could verbally say yes, or no she would’ve found a way to end the relationship because that’s her baby. and that’s really all she saw him as.
He has the mind of an infant. How exactly were they to communicate with him about sex?
@@karidowns yes your right I realize a few days after posting the comments it did not sound right. I tried to edit the comments, but for some reason, I could not do it on my iPad. Don’t get me wrong after watching the documentary a few more times after this I agree that she SA him should have gotten 24 year prison I just know there are those parents and the mom strikes me as one of those parents, even if he was fully mentally confident, and he could understand she would not allow him to be in a sexual relationship I also think the mother and the brother could’ve done a lot more to prevent this from happening in the first place,
Yep. Both parties were actually abusing him. The way the mom was so focused on words MY,MINE, I KNOW, when talking about her son...and the way they mostly went on and on about degrading the family, and not so much abou Derrick. This woman's whole identity was developed around being a caretaker and a mom. Anna and mom are actually very similar. Manipulative and selfish.
@allieaudio9965 The mother was not abusive. She is the sole caregiver who is responsible for a man who has the mentality of 6 month old. Going into mama bear mode and claiming a child is common with mothers, especially when abuse is present.
@thecapableplanet7885 I agree that the brother and mother could have done more to prevent this from happening. I believe they both wanted the process to work. From the mother's standpoint, I felt she saw it as a relief from being so hands-on as his sole caregiver. Once things took a turn, she went into mama bear mode.
Thank you for sharing this well informed and lived experience opinion. I did learn a lot.
Thank you for this.
Thank you for sharing your perspective! It is much needed with all of the dominant abelist discourse flying around. Derrick / Dman is just made a victim, with no agency. That whole 'mental age' thing is bs, as you called it. Keep up the good work ♥️✨
@ericamones I have 2 sincere questions how could the documentary have attempted to get Derek‘s perspective on the matter given his limited ability to communicate my second question is although I do think people who are disabled, can have consensual relationships in the case of Derek, who has such a limited ability to communicate how would assess if he is actually giving consent or not?
Can I just say that I am so proud that I have just accepted a temporary position with CUNY (Staten Island) precisely because they attract students just like Erica. I cannot wait to work for them.
I agree with you and I think this synopsis of the documentary will start a conversation that needs to be had. Disabled people should not be cut off from the sexual part of life.
Yes that is abslolutely right. But i think protecting them from R*PE should not be cut off, don't you think?
@@lenalounadjega safe sex always
@@blastlachy2802 can you explain what exactly you mean with 'safe sex' in that context pls?
@@blastlachy2802 Disabled people with the mental capacity of an infant can't discuss sex. Derrick CAN'T discuss sex. We don't need to have a conversation about that. It's common sense.
You are great, Erica, I appreciate you very much! Smart, nice and pretty girl!
The process used by the police to gather the evidence for the charge was solid; if she screws up again she will be easy to catch.
Not all criminals are smart.
SUBSCRIBED!!!!
I think youve misunderstood the concept of mental age. No one (or atleast people who understand the concept) is saying that someone who is 30, are actually 9. What they are saying is someone who is 30 may only score on a standardised assessment on the same level as people who are 9. E.g. your ability to think about abstract concepts is on par with a 9 year old.
Also with IQ, there are several sections, you can get a partial iq score based on a specific cognition if you can complete it. If you cannot complete an iq because you cannot talk, that doesnt mean you get a low IQ. You just dont have an IQ score at all because it cant be measured this way, and cognitions maybe tested in other ways.
I do completely agree that more people with lived experiences should have been on it. There have been people who both found benefits of people with this, but also people who experienced unwanted sexual contact under the guise of empowerment. Showing these perspectives would be good.
Commenting again to emphasize that your advice at the end is EXTREMELY apt. I could sense just from watching the documentary that I will have to be very selective about who’s opinions on it I’m going to pay attention to.
The general public is so painfully ignorant to the nuances of both disabled people and sexuality (never mind disabled people’s sexuality) and I just know my heart can’t take the kind of shit people are saying about it.
@olhydra from what I can tell Erica only disabled UA-camr speaking on this, I haven’t been able to find anyone else and don’t get me wrong if Anna did do these things to this man and he wasn’t able to consent, she needs to be thrown under the jail they also know there are people that are just like this guy with similar physical limitations who are nonverbal but use devices such as iPad and things to communicate, but even in a situation like that if somebody consented, I still think the general public would somehow say they weren’t able to consent because they couldn’t physically verbalize. It was a mouse if you get my point.
As a brother of a mentally challenge sibling, this video is an excellent display of why 1) Having a physical disability makes you in no way what so ever more understanding of what mental disability is than any other physical state. Physical and mental disability are two different things. 2) Crip theory is nothing else than another university sect based on people whos need to compensate for their inferiority complex exist at the cost of their common sense. Mentally disabled people and their families need real care and it needs to not be based in these kind of cult practices.
@@HerrAndreasSkog the point of my video is sweeping generalizations are harmful and incorrect.
@@EricaMones The point of your video is that you dont understand that severely mentally challenge people are really mentally challenged. Because you think that on one hand everyone should be treated with equal respect regardless of ability but on the other hand you really want severely mentally handicapped people to not be mentally handicapped at all. You want to be really tolerant but you prefer that somewhere deep inside the people who are to be tolerated for their differences, there is someone just like you, who can think and conseptualize things.
You are wrong. Inside of mentally challenged people, there are no non-mentally challenged people trying to get out. They are exactly what they look like. If you are truly so tolerant and accepting, start off with accepting that. Inside of D-man, there is no misunderstood intellectual who wants to get out. Inside of all these kids who have been dragged to one well paid charlatan or the other to have their hands held to typewriters to write nonsense their desperate parents want to hear and keep paying for, there wan never ever a child who wanted to write those things. There was never anyone like you in there. There was never anyone their parents hoped would be there inside of them.
Stop projecting yourself on these humans. They are truly different than you.
@@EricaMones Accept that there are people who are not like you. Not at all. Not on the inside, not on the outside. There is noone like you deep deep inside of them who wants to get out. Acceps that and then call yourself tolerant and accepting.
@@HerrAndreasSkog I never said everyone was like me. You’re putting words in my mouth.
@@EricaMones Yes you do. You wanna be tolerant and give everyone the same rights but you also cant let go of the Idea that they must, deep inside, be the same as you are. If you truly want to be for the same rights for everybody then you must accept that there are people who are not like you and giving them rights will mean something truly different than rights for you and others like you. My family was destroyed because we live in a country that wants to treat people like my sibling like "everybody else" when that had nothing to do with what my sibling needed. I know what happens when your type of erroneous perspective gets power. Those who suffer the most are those who are truly different and can not speak and then everyone around them.
This is the conversation I felt has been missed in the discourse on the doc.