I am so fortunate: really, so incredibly
fortunate. In all areas of my life this has become apparent in recent years,
and even in this homestay in Cato Manor I somehow ended up with the best family
imaginable. I really don’t know how I lucked out so well. Yeah, the walls might
be very thin and without ceilings, the lack of a shower and hand washing my
underwear is a bit frustrating, but my host family is absolutely amazing. My
Mama and siblings, Aslam and Silingile are completely wonderful. When I was
sick, they were so sweet and felt so badly for me. Being sick in a foreign
country in a stranger’s household is a truly awful feeling, but I have come out
of it on top and am now appreciating my host family immensely. It is certainly
a full-immersion experience.
Every morning my Mama makes sure I am
feeling well, while she is running around the house doing numerous chores
before going off to work. She works so hard and literally has no downtime- at
all. She gets up at 5 AM and gets home around 6 PM when she cooks us an
elaborate and delicious meal. We sit around the TV watching South African
soaps- Generations is the best. They also watch this odd American show called
The Bold and the Beautiful, which I had never heard of and is horribly
predictable, yet oddly captivating. After our two shows end, we usually watch
the news, which is partly in English and partly in Zulu. This is very common
and I have come to identify it as “Zunglish”, similar to Spanglish, but with
more clicking. I am lucky that my family watches the news at all; most families
only watch soap operas all night. Speaking of Zulu- I got a 96% on my first
Zulu test! For a girl who can’t do languages, I’m pleased with myself! Zulu is
a VERY complex language and I would definitely prefer to learn Swahili, but I
suppose it is interesting.
I read an article for class that discussed
the changing discourses in development and this new idea of holistic
development: connecting the environment, health and the economy in one essence.
In reality, they already are entirely connected, by way of the world, but this
sphered diagram showed how intertwined they are. The article discussed how
“health”, both human and ecological health has interdisciplinary and
interdimensional components. The article argued that economic growth does not
have to infringe on the environment or health. And likewise, environmental
protection and health-based approaches do not have to be counter-economic growth.
Furthermore, the sectorial approach to life, development and health is no
longer appropriate. For instance, human health is not simply the absence of
disease or infirmity. Human health involves the body, but also the mind and the
spirit. The same can be said for the earth, in which economic development does
not have to be the counter-action for sustainability and health. They can act
together, as one. I really, really enjoyed this article. An interdisciplinary
and humanistic approach to the economy, environment and health is so
innovative, for some reason. It seems to be the only logical way to approach
development.
The article led to an interesting class
discussion on the role and future of development. There is growing agreement
that the GDP measurement approach to determine development is insufficient.
People are realizing that economic growth does not necessarily equate to social
welfare and thus development should be measured in additional ways, such as
education, power shifts, etc. Sustainable development is a fascinating area of
study that is constantly changing and evolving. It acknowledges that
development must be approached in an interdisciplinary way and that solely
economic approaches to development are insufficient. I really love this
approach. As you’ve probably heard me rant before, “talent is universal,
opportunity is not.” Through sustainable development, opportunity and
empowerment can be global and available to everyone.
Some
updates… the South Africa versus Botswana game was AWESOME! We won, which was
great and unexpected since the team has been playing poorly. The game was
shorter than I anticipated, but it was great fun and I enjoyed being in the
World Cup stadium. Since then, we have been incredibly busy with schoolwork. We
leave for school at 6:40 in the morning and return at 4:30, when we are
immediately sitting down to do our readings and/or write essays. I am really
enjoying the classes, especially the ‘Approaches to Community Health’ courses.
They are very similar to the CLCS (comparative literary and cultural studies)
classes that I take at Franklin. While they could be more academically
rigorous, the classes are as hard as you make them.
Socially, we haven’t done much lately
besides attempt to avoid the “serial daters” in Cato. There are about five guys
who allegedly date SIT girls every single program and they are beginning to
prey on us. Apparently they are very charming and whatnot, but I don’t see it
yet. It shall be interesting. In other news, I am SO excited for this upcoming
weekend. We are going to St. Lucia and going on a safari. I am paying $40 extra
and going in an open-air land cruiser (some others are staying in the closed
van- which will be quite anti-climactic). I am incredibly excited to see
rhinos! We are also going on a boat trip, going snorkelling and staying in a
place with SHOWERS and HOT WATER! This is going to be a great weekend.
I am currently trying to narrow down my
options for grad school applications. I want to apply to a maximum of five
programs. Help me decide (the highlighted programs are the ones I am most
intrigued by):
LSE:
-MSc
International Development and Humanitarian Emergencies http://www.lse.ac.uk/study/graduate/taughtProgrammes2013/MScInternationalDevelopmentAndHumanitarianEmergencies.aspx
-MSc
Development Studies http://www.lse.ac.uk/study/graduate/taughtProgrammes2013/MScDevelopmentStudies.aspx
Kings College
London
-MSc Global Health and Social Justice http://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/departments/sshm/study/globalhealth.aspx
BU:
Medical
Anthropology-http://www.bu.edu/academics/gms/programs/medical-anthropology-and-cross-cultural-practice/
University of Glasgow
MSc Global
Health (also very interdisciplinary) http://www.gla.ac.uk/postgraduate/taught/globalhealth/
University
College London
MSc Environment and Sustainable Development
MSc Anthropology, Environment and Development
MSc Health and Society: Social Epidemiology
I am not sure whether I definitely want to
attend graduate school directly following Franklin, but I want the option (if I
get in!). I’d love to hear feedback from whoever is reading this J I am almost entirely positive that I want to study in London
following graduation. Of anywhere I have travelled, London feels so much like
home and has incredible diversity, world-class academics, and a wonderful
cultural vibrancy that I am addicted to. It also has free museum entrances,
which sparks my nerdy-ness.
We are off to visit four special needs
schools this morning. The South African education system is another hugely
complex conundrum. The post-apartheid education system has incredible
corruption, inadequate teachers, low resources and so on. Unemployment is very
high, even for high school graduates and attending high school is not
incentivized with employment opportunities or even better lifestyles. There is
really no reason for students to attend high school. The only potential incentive
to attend school is that children are guaranteed a meal, however without proper
kitchens and food storage, this meal is often not prepared well and the food
has often been left out. This makes me worry for my homestay sister, Silingile,
who wants to become a nurse. She and her fellow classmates have high goals, of
being nurses, doctors, pilots, lawyers, etc. It is similar to little kid’s
ambitions back home. I hope they have the opportunity to pursue these dreams
and goals!
I forgot to post this last night, so I will
just add on with some reflections from our visit to the special needs school.
The only problem is, I don’t know where to begin. I have not had much
experience with special needs children and besides knowledge from my psychology
minor and experience with therapeutic riding, know little about mental and
physical impairments. I, along with three classmates visited the Open Air School.
This school is very old; it was established in 1921 and was historically an all
white school. Obviously, this is no longer the case, but the school has
maintained its reputation as a highly prestigious special needs school. On the
drive there, our academic director noted, “the kids actually learn at Open
Air”. This was interesting to me and laid the foundation for my curiosity
surrounding special needs education today in South Africa.
Prior to arriving, we knew very little
about the special needs programs in South Africa and very little about the
school besides its historical significance. Upon entering, I noted that the
school was very large and relatively well resourced. The school was clean, the
people were friendly and there was a very welcoming atmosphere. An
administrator who doubles as a science teacher took us on a tour for the
morning. She began by describing the school to us. The Open Air School takes
children with all types of disability: mental and physical. There are blind
students, autistic students, students with cerebral palsy and so on. All of
these students, depending on their grade level (not age) are taught in the same
classroom. One teacher would be teaching visually impaired, mentally disabled
and physically disabled students at once. This was incredibly astounding to me
and I immediately assumed that the school would be completely dysfunctional,
uncontrollable and largely unsuccessful, simply given the inherent difficulties
of teaching such a variety of learning styles at once. To make this even more
difficult, there is no separate curriculum for special needs students; they
have to take the same exams as regular schools. The state is supposed to supply
alternative tests with bigger font or braille, depending on the student’s requirement,
but they rarely do and the school is responsible for manufacturing these exams.
Our first stop on the tour was to the toddler’s
classrooms. The Open Air school takes children as young as three years old
through matriculation. These toddlers absolutely took my breath away. We walked
into this classroom and it appeared very similar to the colourful classrooms I
grew up in with lots of toys, activities and games. In the corner, a little
blind boy was working on a fitting puzzle pieces into their respective slots.
He immediately said hello to us and the teacher giving us the tour. He
recognized her voice immediately and knew who she was. The other children were
all working on similar activities, often unique to their own disabilities. Several
children were drawing, playing with toys and so on. Despite physical and mental
handicaps, they were just kids and were so sweet. Next, we went to another
toddler classroom. In this room, there were more physically handicapped
students. One little girl, who could not have been more than three, had a
severe deformity of her legs. In order to walk, she had an extended boot,
basically an almost foot-long high heel and used crutches. She was leading the
class around, dancing in a circle, happy as could be. The kids were singing a
song about the days of the week and were practicing remembering the names of
the months.
We were given tours of the physical
therapy, occupational therapy, speech therapy, medical centre, and older
classrooms. They rely heavily on communication between staff members and the
mutual respect between the staff members was clearly evident. We were told that
a major problem in the educational system is the lack of funding for teachers
salaries. Apparently, in order to teach, a woman teacher would theoretically
have to have family money or a well-paid husband to support her. While this is
obviously frustrating, it seemed to me that it is actually ensuring that the
teachers are truly passionate about their work. We were told, “a teacher will
either leave within the first week or will stay for thirty years”. It is very
rare that a teacher would stay for only five years simply due to the severe
complexity of teaching these special needs students.
The speech therapist gave us a very
inspiring talk about the necessity for early intervention, an area of
drastically poor performance in South Africa. She said that one of the main
problems in the South African health system is the lack of early diagnosis and
early intervention. Many of the special needs students attending Open Air are
not diagnosed until ages five or six. This is past the critical period of
intervention, and while it is still obviously beneficial to enrol them, the
benefits of earlier intervention are vast and noteworthy. She was [justifiably]
incredibly frustrated by this entirely preventable problem.
One third of the students at Open Air are
orphans. Many of them are AIDS orphans and many were abandoned because their
parents (most often their fathers) disowned them and/or did not accept them.
Our guide pointed out one mentally impaired teenage girl (from a distance), who
had been burned so badly by her family that all of her smaller extremities,
ears, nose, fingers, toes were damaged beyond the point of repair. She has been
going through some reconstructive surgery, but the burns are still very evident
and impair her ability to do many things. Despite this, she wants to be a model
and thinks she is incredibly beautiful (which she is!). As we were told, the
kids here teach us just as much, if not more than we teach them. It is amazing
how normal these kids were; despite facing incredible adversity, they are just
kids.
Back at the SIT office, we had an hour long
debrief, discussing the four different schools we went to and the current
debates about whether special needs programs can/should be allotted the
astronomical amount of funding necessary to run their schools, when the
students are less likely to contribute to societal/economic growth. Before I
rant about the second point, the four schools were very different. Obviously, I
went to one of the more adequately resourced schools. Two of the schools were
severely under-resourced and my classmates felt that they were more like
day-care centres than educational schools.
The second point of our discussion, about
whether special needs programs can justifiably get such a large portion of
funding really struck a nerve with me, especially after seeing how well these
kids could succeed, given the right tools. Putting the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights (1948) aside, quantifying a human life on a basis of economic
output is exorbitantly unethical, unjust and completely illogical. For some
reason, there is this perceived “need” to quantify EVERYTHING and measure
everything by its economic output or value. In my opinion, very, very few
things can actually be measured solely on an economic basis and human worth is
absolutely not one of them. The fact that the only place many of these kids
call home, the Open Air School, could be closed due to reallocated funding
because they might not ‘contribute’ as much economically to a society
absolutely makes my blood boil. It is also entirely incorrect. For instance, look
at Stephen Hawkins (Hawkings?). One of the greatest minds of our era is
physically disabled, yet his mental capacity is unsurpassed.
Regardless, quantifying human life makes me
absolutely infuriated. This also goes back to the problems of health care
delivery. Simply because of my skin colour, where I was born and the
opportunities I have been given (for arbitrary reasons), I have access to much
better healthcare than a poor black South African (for example). This is
completely illogical. I did absolutely nothing to deserve my skin colour, place
of birth or good fortune. Yet for some reason I am privileged because of these
arbitrary factors. With free market economies, the rich and poor classes
inevitably divide depending on their available resources. With the growth of
privatization, many private healthcare centres and hospitals were initiated.
These centres were often more efficient and effective than public centres, so
people who could afford the private care bought it. This left the poor
population with the under resourced, underfunded and ineffective public
hospitals. With the pervasive cycles of poverty and disease, poorer people are
inherently more susceptible to diseases ( “diseases of the poor”- the social
determinants of health). Since the public healthcare system is so poor and the
beneficiaries can’t afford it anyway, they often wait until they are very sick
with chronic infections and debilitating diseases. We end up with excellent
healthcare for the people who don’t need it and horrific healthcare for those
who need it desperately. Many public health professionals are predicting that
we are going to pay for this soon. Diseases of the poor won’t always stay with
the poor.
Sorry for the doomsday speech, but it
frustrates me endlessly. On a brighter note, we are going to St. Lucia tomorrow
and will be going on a safari, on a boat cruise and snorkelling! Three of my
favourite things J
