DIVING INTO DISABILITY STUDIES WITH NATHANJE DIJKSTRA

By Claudia Hacke & Fayrouz Gomaa

Nathanje Dijkstra is a PhD candidate in the Cultural History research group at Utrecht University. She started her research in September 2017 and focuses on disability identity formation in the context of the Dutch Ongevallenwet (1901-1967). During her History Bachelor’s programme, she quickly found her way into Cultural History, as she was very much interested in the philosophical and theoretical side of the discipline. Here, Nathanje discovered the research field of disability studies and history, a discipline she found extremely fascinating. In 2015, she obtained her Research Master’s degree in Amsterdam with a thesis on different theoretical models on the incapacity to work.

After her graduation, Nathanje started working as a research assistant for Willemijn Ruberg for two years. Additionally, she used her spare time to work on her PhD proposal, as her goal was to obtain a doctoral degree. Nathanje believes the university is the best place to reflect on questions about the past and society, while at the same time continuously grow as a researcher and educate yourself and others. After having been rejected at her first attempt with the NWO, her second try turned out to be successful, and she was allowed to start her PhD trajectory in 2017.

Her research is on Dutch disability legislation and its influence on people with disabilities, as well as its impact on thinking about being handicapped in the twentieth century. In order to receive unemployment relief, you needed to have a certain label that said you were unfit to work. Within this context, Nathanje looks at the emergence and disappearance of new labels. What do people do with these labels, and what do the labels do with the people? Nathanje mainly looks at the procedures and practices that come with it. What influence do the procedures and practices have on thinking about disabilities? What changes in society? But also, how do the people with disabilities feel about it? She mostly uses court records, specifically appeals and witness statements, because in these moments, disability is frequently discussed. During these court cases, doctors decide whether or not (and to what degree) somebody is disabled. They use very specific practices to measure this; for example, to what degree someone can bend their finger. What does this tell us about disability? What are the ideas that are involved with disability? How does it work? What is it exactly?

Nathanje believes historians should always use methods, even though it might not be a coherent system for everybody. In her current research, she uses praxiography to look closely at practices, which helps her to look at what happens, what people do and how disability manifests itself. Nathanje is a firm believer that all historical research should be relevant. In fact, according to her, all research is political, because all the choices you make in your research involve ideas which have a sociocultural component. Aside from the more pragmatic fact that you will not get your research funded if it is not relevant to politics or society, you also cannot escape it. Nathanje does not believe in the idea of science as a solitary field where you can guarantee objectivity, and thinks it is naïve to think otherwise. In her view, you would be missing an opportunity to make a contribution to society by not making your research relevant.