Performers with disabilities in the entertainment industry of Southern California work together as a cohesive force for change, challenging common misconceptions about disability reflected in television and movies. This qualitative study was based on videotaped interviews with a cohort of actors and media activists with physical disabilities working in television and film. Narratives, field notes, and reflexive journal entries were coded, analyzed, and interpreted using qualitative methods. Ethnography and grounded theory approaches were combined, offering a conceptual framework suggesting that, for the participants in this study, performance is a transformative occupation or of such primary importance as to substantially organize their lives. A love of acting appears to inspire the creativity, adaptiveness, and motivation necessary to advance their careers despite significant personal challenges and social barriers inhibiting participation within the industry. This study provides evidence of the potential for occupational engagement to change people's lives while also changing society.
AldrichR. M. (2008). From complexity theory to transactionalism: Moving occupational science forward in theorizing the complexities of behavior. Journal of Occupational Science, 15, 147–156.
2.
BlackR. S., & PretesL. (2007). Victims and victors: Representations of physical disability on the Silver Screen. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 32, 66–83.
3.
BreedenL. (2008). Transformative occupations: Life experiences of performers with disabilities in film and television. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California). Dissertation Abstracts International, 69, AAT 3311187.
DavisF. (1961). Deviance disavowal: The management of strained interaction by the visibly handicapped. Social Problems, 9, 120–132.
6.
DavisL. (2002). Bodies of difference: Politics, disability, and representation. In SnyderS.BrueggenmannB. J., & Garland-ThomsonR. (Eds.), Disability studies: Enabling the humanities (pp. 100–106). New York: The Modern Language Association of America.
7.
DenzinN. K., & LincolnY. S. (1994). Entering the field of qualitative research. In DenzinN. K. & LincolnY. S. (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (pp. 1–34). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
8.
DickieV.CutchinM. P., & HumphryR. (2006). Occupation as transactional experience: A critique of individualism in occupational science. Journal of Occupational Science, 13, 83–93.
9.
EnnsA., & SmitC. R. (2001). Screening disability: Essays on cinema and disability. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
10.
FrankG. (1996). The concept of adaptation as a foundation for occupational science research. In ClarkF. & ZemkeR. (Eds.), Occupational science: The evolving discipline (pp. 47–55). Philadelphia: F. A. Davis.
11.
FrankG. (2000). Venus on wheels. Los Angeles: UC Berkeley Press.
12.
FrankG. (2011). The transactional relationship between occupations and place: Indigenous cultures in the American Southwest. Journal of Occupational Science, 18, 3–30.
13.
FrankG., & ZemkeR. (2009). Occupational therapy foundations for political engagements and social transformation. In PollardN.KronenbergF., & SakellariouD. (Eds.), Political perspectives in occupational therapy (pp. 111–136). Edinburgh: Elsevier.
14.
Garland-ThomsonR. (2005). Dares to stares: Disabled women performance artists & the dynamics of staring. In SandahlC. & AuslanderP. (Eds.), Bodies in commotion: Disability & performance (pp. 30–41). Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
15.
Garland-ThomsonR. (2009). Staring: How we look. Oxford: University Press.
HahnH. (1997). Advertising the employable image: Disability and capitalism. In DavisL. (Ed.), The disability studies reader (pp. 172–186). New York: Routledge.
19.
KielhofnerG. (1992). Conceptual foundations of occupational therapy. Philadelphia: F. A. Davis.
20.
KielhofnerG. (2005). Rethinking disability and what to do about it: Disability studies and its implications for occupational therapy. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 59, 487–496.
21.
KingG.BaldwinP.CurrieM., & EvansJ. (2006). The effectiveness of strategies for youth with disabilities. Childrens Health Care, 35, 155–178.
22.
KrahnG. L.PutnamM.DrumC. E., & PowersL. (2006). Disabilities and health: Toward a national agenda for research. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 17, 18–27.
23.
KronenbergF., & PollardN. (2005). Overcoming occupational apartheid: A preliminary exploration of the political nature of occupational therapy. In KronenbergF.AlgadoS., & PollardS. (Eds.), Occupational therapy without borders: Learning from the spirit of survivors (pp. 58–86). Edinburgh: Elsevier.
24.
KronenbergF., & PollardN. (2006). Political dimensions of occupation and the roles of occupational therapy. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 60, 617–625.
25.
LeighI.PowersL.VashC., & NettlesR. (2004). Survey of psychological service to clients with disabilities: The need for awareness. Rehabilitation Psychology, 49, 48–54.
LintonS. (1998). Claiming disability: Knowledge and identity. New York: New York University Press.
28.
LongmoreP. (1985). Screening stereotypes: Images of disabled people. Social Policy, 32, 31–38.
29.
MagasiS. (2008). Disability studies in practice: A work in practice. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation, 15, 611–617.
30.
McCormackC., & CollinsB. (2010). Can disability studies contribute to client-centered occupational therapy practice?British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 73, 339–342.
31.
MilesM. B., & HubermanA. M. (Eds.). (1994). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications.
32.
NordenM. (1994). The cinema of isolation: A history of physical disability in the movies. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
33.
RaynorO., & HaywardK. (2005, May). The employment of performers with disabilities in the entertainment industry: Screen Actors Guild Executive Summary. Los Angeles: University of California, National Arts and Disability Center.
34.
RaynorO., & HaywardK. (2009). Breaking into the business: Experiences of actors with disabilities in the entertainment industry. Journal of Research in Special Education Needs, 9, 39–47.
35.
SandahlC. (2008). Why disability identity matters from dramaturgy to casting in John Belluso's “Pyretown.”Text and Performance Quarterly, 28, 225–241.
36.
SowersJ.McLeanD., & OwensC. (2002). Self-directed employment for people with developmental disabilities: Issues, characteristics, and illustrations. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 13, 96–103.
37.
TownsendE., & WhitefordA. (2005). A participatory occupational justice framework: Population-based processes of practice. In KronenbergF.AlgadoSimo S., & PollardN. (Eds.), Occupational therapy without borders: Learning from the spirit of survivors (pp. 110–126). Edinburgh: Elsevier.
38.
ZemkeR., & ClarkF. (1996). Occupational science: The evolving discipline. Philadelphia: F. A. Davis.
