Why disabled people should do more ‘unsuitable’ things

A new yellow sign popped up by some train tracks around the corner from The D*List office a few weeks ago; it aggressively reads: “CROSSING UNSUITABLE FOR MOBILITY DEVICES”.

So we asked Auckland Transport why it appears we’ve been banned from crossing the road to get to the other side. Was there a recent accident involving a mobility aid-user? Are disabled people ‘unsuitable’ to cross all train tracks? What does ‘unsuitable’ even mean in this situation? 

Merriam-Webster defines unsuitable as: “not fitting or right for a use or purpose”. Isn’t it Auckland Transport’s job to design and build level crossings that are suitable and fitting for mobility device-users? 

My inner journalist was hoping I’d uncover some drama which led to this mysterious sign being put up, but the reason was kind of boring. An AT spokesperson said the sign was placed there following a recommendation contained in a Level Crossing Safety Impact Assessment. Yawn. The footpath around the level crossing on George Street appears to be steeper than a 1:20 gradient, so it is considered a “potential mobility/accessibility issue” hence the decision to place the sign there.

The spokesperson emphasised: “This sign doesn’t mean mobility [aid] users cannot cross there. It serves as an advance warning to take extra care.”

It got me thinking about all the times we are advised by others where we can and cannot go: no, you can’t go to this school, but yes you can enrol in this ‘special needs’ unit. No, you can’t use the toilet here. Yes, you can sit with all the other wheelchair-users in the wheelchair bay at that concert. 

If these authority figures are going to control spaces and write them off as being ‘unsuitable’, then surely they should also provide alternative options that are suitable and just as appealing? However, this is not the reality and sometimes our only choice is ignoring the warning signs and doing the ‘unsuitable’ thing anyway. 

While I’m not encouraging us to put ourselves in harm’s way, unfortunately there are some serious consequences when the ‘unsuitable’ is our only option. Back in 2013, a wheelchair-user was hit by a train at a crossing. The woman’s wheelchair got stuck in the rail tracks and she was dragged along by the train that struck her. Would a warning sign to take extra care have made a difference for this woman? Maybe, or maybe not.

Taking risks is accepted as a part of life, except when it comes to disabled people apparently. But we should be empowered to make our own risk-taking decisions because the alternative is rather boring. If I stuck to only going places deemed safe and suitable for wheelchair-users, I’d spend a lot of time at home, visiting hospitals and hanging out at rest homes.

We should have the freedom to choose to jump in the mosh pit at a concert or go to whatever school we want. We should have the autonomy to make the choice to simply cross the road. 

It was hardly surprising that when I asked AT whether they had consulted disabled people prior to putting their sign up, their answer was no. “We acknowledge that our contractor has completed the programme of recommendations for George Street Level Crossing, however the installation of the sign was completed before consultation with the Local Board, or advice to our accessibility users was complete.”

So if their safety advice came from a routine assessment, rather than lived-experience from actual mobility-aid users - is the warning sign even that accurate? It’s not gonna stop me from going over that level crossing. The alternative is a 25 minute detour.

If you need another reason to do the ‘unsuitable’ thing, I’ll leave you with an anecdote of the time I was deemed a ‘health and safety issue’ on an ice skating date with my boyfriend. 

That evening I learned my boyfriend competed in ice hockey at high school so he was hooning around the ice by himself, sweating up a storm: not the romantic date I had in mind. But to top it off, just 10 minutes after being on the ice, I was told wheelchairs were not allowed on the ice for health and safety reasons. We weren’t informed when we bought our tickets and there wasn’t anything on the website about it. 

Maybe it was the injustice of it, or maybe the adrenaline from zooming around the ice, but my boyfriend was understandably fired up about it, especially when we were told we couldn't even get a refund. 

After some back and forth with the ice skating rink police, he let me stay on the ice as long as I wore a helmet and “tried not to crash into anyone”. My unromantic ice skating date was redeemed, even with a sweaty boyfriend.

Being out in the wild as a wheelchair-user can be quite the adventure. It’s a gamble whether or not we can even access a local cafe. Sometimes we’re accosted by passers-by who ask us intrusive questions. And if we’re lucky, we might even come face to face with a literal sign that deems us ‘unsuitable’ for trying to cross a road.

Subscribe to our weekly newsletter, The D*List Delivered!