Olympic and Paralympics: Should We Integrate?
South African Sprinter Oscar Pistorius posing for a British Telecom campaign. Source: http://oscarpistorius.com
“You are not disabled by the disabilities you have, you are able by the abilities you have.” – Oscar Pistorious
This quote by Oscar Pistorious is the banner for his official website and the mantra for his life. Born without a fibula, in either leg, Pistorious had a double, below-knee amputation as an infant, and mastered his first set of prosthetic limbs before he was two-years old. And that was just the beginning.
Today Oscar continues to fight to define himself by his abilities. He wants to compete at the 2012, London Olympics and has almost earned that right. In July 2011, Pistorious clocked a 45.07 in the 400 meter, a time well below the “A” qualifying standard of 45.25. Two more “A” standard runs next season automatically qualifies Oscar for a spot on the South African team; he could also run in the Games if his 400-meter time is in the top three among his countrymen.
But should he compete?
Pistorious has already shattered Paralympic records in the 100, 200, & 400 meter events. He has won numerous gold medals and has broken his own world records some 30 times. He is a world class sprinter but he is an amputee, an athlete with a disability. Should he be able to compete in both arenas?
He has the legal right, he fought, and won, that battle in 2007. But just because its legal, is it right?
Paralympic legend, Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson, believes that, “If he makes the Olympics then his 400m event should not be run at the Paralympics because the Paralympics should never be a B final.”
I agree with Grey-Thompson, the Paralympics should never be seen as a “B” final. But they are. Like people with disabilities themselves, events for people with disabilities are seen as sub-par. The Paralympics receive significantly less funding, less sponsors and less media coverage than the Olympics, and for some deep-seeded sociological reason, Paralympics athletes are not viewed at the same level as Olympic athletes. In a recent article about Pistorious, the author stated,
“At just 24 years of age, and having dominated the Paralympic scene for so long, and with the next step – world champs and Olympic level – in wait for this track sensation; the sky really is the limit for Oscar Pistorious!”
Why are the Olympics, “the next step?” the Paralympics is a select sporting event for elite athletes with a disability. The focus is on athletes’ abilities and achievements rather than their disabilities. Participants, train, compete and give as much, if not more than their Olympic counterparts with significantly less support and funding. Yet, society views Paralympic athletes as second-class competitors.
Is this why Pistorious is hell bent on crossing the razors edge to compete in the Olympics? Is competing against able-bodied athletes the only way for an athlete with a disability can get the accolades he/she deserves. And is it fair? The top able-bodied marathon record is 2:03:02 help by Geoffrey Mutai. It is an amazing time, but it is significantly slower than Ernst Van Dyk‘s wheelchair time of 1:18:27. Why aren’t they competing against one another?
Because… Van Dyke has the mechanical advantage of wheels, so he and Mutai are in a different class. The goal of the Paralympics and the Olympics is to determine who is best in their class. They are the same event, and instead of deeming one better than the other, they should be integrated.
There should be the women’s 400 wheelchair race and the women’s 400 running division. The criteria for who gets to compete against who, should be based on matching up abilities, mechanical advantages, and assistive technologies. If Pistorious’ prosthetics don’t give him a mechanical advantage then let him run in the 2-legged, ambulatory race, but if they do, then let him compete against other runners in his class.
There is a bigger issue at play in the controversy surrounding Oscar Pistorious, and it is that issue that must be addressed if we are ever to achieve an equitable playing field for people of all abilities.
A good starting point would be to integrate the two competitions (If not the individual events) so that paralympian and 'able-bodied' events took place in the same arenas, in the same time frame, alongside each other. With the current arrangements in place, once the maintream Olympics is over, the vast majority of the spectators (and the mainstream media) leave the venue, without ever being exposed to paralympian events. Consequently, the paralympians often compete in mostly empty stadiums. They deserve to have the full Olympic audiences. Even if we don't see paralympians and able-bodied athletes competing directly against each other, al least the paralympians would get the vast attendances they deserve while being seen on the same days, with the same media coverage as mainstream athletes. I would certainly be more than happy to see, for instance, Oscar Pistorius and Usian Bolt performing on the same day, even if not against each other. Surely, running the two competitions concurrently could only be a good thing?
[...] Index. We continue to excel in numerous areas of human competition and expression, be it sports, the arts or technological research. Yet, our achievements and success often attract little [...]
[...] have the potential to increase access to a range of books for people with disabilities. The ability to customise the print size on your eReader provides easy access to large print books, [...]
[...] Olympic champion. Watching the Olympics reminds us of how amazing the human body is, and of all its potential. In the upcoming London games, this year’s Olympians will be aiming to run faster, jump [...]
[...] the next six months, we will be covering the Olympics from a variety of angles, including a focus on this year’s Games (the sportspeople, the [...]