The Consequences of Structural Stigma For Employment, Marriage, and Independent Living Among Deaf Individuals in 19th Century America
Open Access
- Author:
- Lemmon, Megan Elaine
- Graduate Program:
- Sociology
- Degree:
- Doctor of Philosophy
- Document Type:
- Dissertation
- Date of Defense:
- June 28, 2019
- Committee Members:
- Molly Ann Martin, Dissertation Advisor/Co-Advisor
Molly Ann Martin, Committee Chair/Co-Chair
Jennifer Lynne Van Hook, Committee Member
Steven Andrew Haas, Committee Member
Jonathan Emdin Cook, Outside Member - Keywords:
- stigma
disability
employment
marriage - Abstract:
- This study examines the consequences of structural stigma (i.e., norms, policies, and other social conditions that constrain opportunities and resources for stigmatized groups) by leveraging a unique historical case—sites in 19th century America with reduced structural stigma towards deaf individuals, or deaf enclaves. I hypothesize that deaf people had greater social and economic opportunities if they lived in deaf enclaves compared to living elsewhere in the United States, and that the benefits of living in a deaf enclave were greater for deaf people compared to hearing people. I use data from the 1850 full census to examine three outcomes that were highly valued during this period: employment, marriage, and establishing an independent residence. I also use an original dataset that links samples of deaf and hearing men across the 1850 and 1880 censuses to examine whether exposure to structural stigma during childhood in 1850 had long-term consequences for marriage among these men 30 years later in 1880. My analyses account for community-level differences in support for progressive values, favorable labor market conditions, availability of potential marriage partners, and availability of boarding opportunities to better isolate the role of structural stigma for these outcomes. Most of the results of this study support my hypotheses. In Chapter 4, I find that compared to their deaf peers living elsewhere in the U.S., deaf men living in deaf enclaves in 1850 were more likely to be employed. Residence in deaf enclaves was not associated with employment for hearing men. In Chapter 5, I find that deaf young adults were more likely to have ever married if they were living in a deaf enclave in 1850 relative to their deaf peers living elsewhere in the U.S. In contrast, hearing young adults were slightly less likely to marry if they lived in a deaf enclave. I also find that deaf young adults were more likely to have independent residences in they lived in deaf enclaves in 1850, but only by creating their own households. Contrary to what I expected, deaf young adults in deaf enclaves were not more likely to establish an independent residence by boarding. In Chapter 6, I find that deaf men who were living in deaf enclaves as children in 1850 were more likely to have married as adults in 1880, while residence in a deaf enclave during childhood was not associated with hearing men’s chances of marrying. These results should be interpreted cautiously, however, because 90% of the deaf men in my sample who lived in deaf enclaves as children were also living in deaf enclaves as adults. Consequently, I was not able to distinguish exposure to structural stigma during childhood from exposure during adulthood. Although I cannot definitively say that structural stigma caused these patterns, the fact that only deaf people benefited from living in deaf enclaves increases my confidence that structural stigma could have played a role. These results suggest that structural stigma could have wide-ranging consequences for wellbeing.