Inclusion

​Nothing like self-interest to motivate.  For most of my adult life, I have associated with what is called dis-abled (though that term is falling into disrepute – I’m not balding, I’m folically challenged.  Though I really only have a large part in the middle.  Ok a huge part in the middle.  Oh alright, a humungous part in the middle.)
I have been considering the term “inclusive.”  It seems to me, ramps and rails should have always been a given.  Wide doors and hallways are needed for wheel-chair access.  To me, not to be inclusive should be the exception.  Instead inclusive is like an add-on.
Things that I have always taken for granted, are a challenge to some.  They determine if or if not, an action will take place.  Much preparation is needed to go out.  A friend with polio would park at the top of my drive rather than the bottom.  Consideration needs to be given to the place being visited.  Sometimes it is easier not to go.
Inclusion extends to everyone.  We may not be “dis-abled,” but all things being equal, it is a given we will grow old.  What was not important once, becomes very important.  Worlds shrink.  To me, shrinkage is too soon and more than it needs to be.  I feel accessibility is about inclusion rather than exclusion.
My belief in the importance of the matter extends to the building of houses.  I have a cradle to the grave mentality.  It seems important to governments that people stay in their own homes as long as possible.  Many people want that, but in various cases it cannot happen.
One of the reasons people cannot stay in their own home is to me, because the home was not built as it could be in the first place.  Yet the figure I heard was 20% of the population are “disabled” in some way.
I renovated a bathroom.  I would do it different now.  Bath lips are un-necessary.  I would include more rails and ramps around the home.  If the home is built right in the first place, there will be no need for additions.  Nothing that matters, need be done without.
It was rightly pointed out to me that that would add more cost.  I totally believe it would.  Instead of a home being worth $400,000 it may cost $403,000.  It seems most people accept what is on offer and negotiate a price.
Would I be willing to pay extra for the extra?  My answer is an unequivocal yes - based on the fact that it could extend my time there.  Some would see only the expense.  I look at the advantages.  Maybe ramps and rails are not needed now.  But there is a good chance they will be.
I imagine the insertion of rails could introduce children sooner to the concept that not all are the same, and some diversity is to be embraced, rather than shunned.
Not every scenario could or should be catered for.  I see beautiful houses.  Yet the minute stairs are mentioned I know its usefulness to the occupier, without substantial additional costs, has a reduced life span.
It seems this is relevant to everyone.  I accept things like “sales tax.”  The built-in extra cost of building a home the way it can be, could be accepted.  That way everyone, rather than some, could get on with what needs to be done.  The home is a means to an end, not an end in itself.  Does not inclusion mean adding more?