"Dirty looks": A critical phenomenology of motorized mobility scooter use.

Citation metadata

From: Social Science & Medicine(Vol. 297)
Publisher: Elsevier Science Publishers
Document Type: Report; Brief article
Length: 387 words

Document controls

Main content

Abstract :

Keywords Wheeled mobility device; Scooter; Critical phenomenology; Lifeworlds; Visibility; Invisibility Highlights * New scooter users' experiences are underexplored. * Phenomenology of lifeworlds reveals complexity of their experiences. * New scooter users face challenges adopting a scooter. * Reliance on other mobility devices can be helpful but is not without challenges. * Spatial and attitudinal barriers need to be addressed. Abstract The use of motorized mobility scooters has become increasingly prevalent. Drawing on the critical-phenomenology and disability-studies literature, this study explored the embodied nature of scooter use among 20 new scooter users. The analysis revealed four themes: 1) Navigating the social environment and being (un)seen presented a paradox of how hypervisibility and invisibility can both exist; 2) Transitioning to scooter use revealed the affective component of becoming a scooter user despite the underlying desire to avoid unwanted attention; 3) Experiencing accessibility challenges en route and at destinations demonstrated that the inconsistency in accessibility along different routes unavoidably makes disability more visible; 4) Strategic and personalized use of devices for mobility illustrated how reliance on other mobility devices (e.g. canes and walkers) can be used as a strategy to circumvent the barriers and lessen the visibility of disability. The lifeworlds of "lived relation", "lived body", "lived space", and "lived things" encapsulated the multi-faceted experiences of new scooter users. The critical phenomenology of scooter use emphasized the need for creative strategies to address the physical and attitudinal barriers as well as scooter design-related concerns. Author Affiliation: (a) Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada (b) School of Kinesiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada (c) School of Occupational Therapy, University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada (d) Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Department of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada (e) Vancouver Coastal Health -- Vancouver Home & Community, Vancouver, BC, Canada (f) International Collaboration on Repair Discoveries (ICORD), Vancouver, BC, Canada (g) GF Strong Rehabilitation Research Program, Vancouver, BC, Canada * Corresponding author. GF Strong Rehabilitation Research Program, UBC Department of Occupational Science & Occupational Therapy, 4255 Laurel St., Vancouver, BC, V5Z 2G9, Canada. Article History: Received 17 May 2021; Revised 15 October 2021; Accepted 10 February 2022 Byline: Alfiya Battalova (a), Laura Hurd (b), Sandra Hobson (c), R. Lee Kirby (d), Richelle Emery (e), W. Ben Mortenson [ben.mortenson@ubc.ca] (a,f,g,*)

Source Citation

Source Citation   

Gale Document Number: GALE|A696649691