As soon as that lingering stare caught her attention—lips caught between a downturned pout and a sympathetic smile—Stevie Morris assumed she and her partner, John, were about to receive one of those all-too-familiar inspirational affirmations. Considering she was already well-acquainted with the disability experience through her son, Robert, she thought she knew what to expect. But what was said next caught her completely off-guard, serving as yet another reminder of the casual, often absurd ableism disabled individuals and their families face in public spaces.
The scene unfolded during the second date between Stevie and John. They were enjoying a relaxed breakfast before heading out to visit the Knoxville Museum of Art. Their first in-person date had taken place only the night before, but they were already well past the introductory stages of getting to know one another. Building on a deep friendship formed through an ongoing long-distance relationship, they were relishing the excitement of having quality time together.
That morning tranquility was abruptly interrupted when a staff member approached their table. The employee expressed utter amazement at the fact that John was responsible for his own meal and managed to retrieve his own juice from the serving station. "He doesn’t even have a whole body!" she exclaimed.
The remark was so pointed and so incredibly specific that Stevie found herself momentarily speechless. Stifling a spreading grin, she gave a curt head nod and briskly left the restaurant. She barely made it outside the front door before bursting into the first of many giggle-fits that John would come to witness throughout their relationship.
Finding humor in the absolute absurdity of people’s ignorance has become a defining coping mechanism for the couple. It is an approach that occasionally elicits a characteristic eye-roll from Robert, though Stevie and John attribute this reaction to normal teenage angst. They know deeply that Robert actually benefits from the shared humor as they navigate everyday moments together as a family.
Reflecting on that interaction later, Stevie often wondered if she would have reacted differently had she been with Robert, or if she would have expected Robert to respond differently to a similar intrusion. Teaching a young person how to respond to ableism is a constant mental task. It is a nuanced, complex process that frequently runs counter to many of the traditional social rules people unknowingly adopt as they learn to function in society. Uncovering these hidden biases and teaching Robert how to address ableism effectively remains one of the most recurring conversations in their parenting journey.
Society often conditions people to follow conflicting unwritten rules. For instance, it is generally considered rude to ignore people, yet Stevie has taught Robert that he has full permission to walk away when faced with intrusive, objectifying, or infantilizing comments. Similarly, people are routinely taught to automatically submit to authority. In contrast, John models and helps Robert practice prioritizing his own needs while critically questioning which claims to authority are actually valid.
A prime example of this dynamic occurs during air travel. Airline wheelchair assistants frequently demand that John and Robert exit an airplane before their personal wheelchairs have been brought back up to the jetbridge. Recognizing the physical vulnerability and impracticality of such demands, they routinely and rightly decline to comply. John has documented these struggles extensively, highlighting the alarming frequency with which airlines threaten disabled passengers with police intervention and outlining how travelers can stand their ground.
Public interactions frequently carry expectations that disabled individuals or their families will offer unsolicited explanations regarding mobility aids and accommodations. To combat this pressure, the family maintains a set list of prepared responses, such as stating plainly that they do not share personal medical information, which they keep practiced and ready to use.
Another deeply ingrained social expectation is the automatic delivery of gratitude. People generally expect a polite "thank you" when assistance is offered, regardless of whether that assistance was solicited or respectful. Stevie has explicitly told Robert that he is entirely justified in pulling away without so much a glance if an uninvited stranger attempts to grab his wheelchair. This dynamic of forced gratitude is something Stevie has explored in depth through her writing, questioning whether disabled people should be conditioned to feel profoundly thankful simply for receiving basic equal access.
Honesty remains a core value within their household, with one humorous exception: the creation of elaborate, entirely fictional tales used to deflect intrusive questions regarding how John or Robert acquired their disabilities. Rather than submitting to invasive queries from strangers, John has occasionally responded to "What happened to you?" by deadpan suggesting that his leg amputations were the result of a shark attack.
Some critics might argue that it would be easier to maintain a single, uniform response strategy for Robert, or to deny him agency over how he responds in order to shield him from how he might be perceived by the public. However, Stevie and John must constantly weigh the immediate social cost against the long-term emotional benefit. Choosing a path requires looking far into the future to evaluate present strategies. They could help shape a teenager who quietly follows conventional rules and fits the mold, but that compliance would come at the direct expense of a piece of his dignity. Alternatively, they can support a young person who ruffles feathers but remains resolutely true to himself and capable of self-advocating. For Stevie and John, the choice regarding the greater good is glaringly obvious.
Even with clear convictions, tackling such a heavy and widespread social justice issue on a personal, day-to-day basis can feel overwhelming. To maintain focus without burning out, Stevie has developed specific mental shifts.
One of the most effective mental frameworks she uses is comparing the ongoing work against ableism to doing laundry. There is no point in time when laundry is ever fully and permanently finished; it is a perpetual cycle of piling up dirty clothes, washing, drying, folding, and putting garments away. Sometimes she avoids the task for an embarrassing amount of time, while other times she doubles down and powers through multiple loads during a full day to catch up. Even after a thorough catch-up day, the clothes currently worn will eventually need cleaning, and the cycle continues. Recognizing this cyclical nature rather than viewing the work through a rigid check-box mentality provides a much more balanced perspective. Success does not require the complete and final eradication of a societal problem that is constantly renewing itself. Instead, the family addresses ableism incrementally—doing a little here and a little there, learning and practicing one response before pivoting to a different approach, and occasionally taking necessary breaks when exhaustion sets in.
Another vital component of their approach is continuous discussion. Stevie consistently makes it a point to ask Robert questions and examine responses together after public encounters. She regularly asks him what they can learn from a specific incident, what worked and what did not, or how a particular comment made him feel. Because Robert’s responses and feelings naturally evolve with time and personal growth, his answers occasionally surprise her. The ultimate goal is never to find a magic fix for societal prejudice, but rather to engage in collaborative problem-solving.
To prepare for high-stress environments, the family actively rehearses potential responses. When recurring problems are identified, they practice together using stuffed animals, acting out different scenarios, or even collaborating on comic books that illustrate the specific strategies they want to employ. Airplane boarding, for instance, was historically a significant source of stress because assistance staff would frequently make assumptions about Robert’s physical abilities and begin moving his wheelchair or dictating boarding procedures without consulting him. By discussing the most effective approach at home—with Stevie roleplaying an overbearing assistant attempting to grab the chair without permission and Robert practicing a clear, respectful refusal—the family builds the muscle memory necessary to handle high-pressure situations smoothly when they arise in the real world.
Even with a wide array of developed skills and strategies, the family still encounters moments where they stumble or wonder if a different approach would have yielded a better result. Constantly examining social interactions places a heavy emotional burden on disabled individuals and their loved ones. Furthermore, John and Stevie acknowledge that what constitutes an acceptable response to ableism shifts depending on numerous intersecting factors, including age, race, gender, and the specific nature of a disability, all of which trigger pre-existing societal assumptions.
By combining proactive planning with a willingness to experiment with different approaches, Stevie and John have successfully fostered Robert’s confidence in identifying and responding to ableism. They share these ongoing family experiences in the hope that they serve as a practical springboard for others navigating similar complex and challenging situations in daily life.
