Jim, I agree that assistance needn’t stigmatize, especially if the design is deliberately non-stigmatizing. My point was that once we’re through designing them, products go out and have a social life all by themselves. In literature they call this “reader response theory” — the author writes the book, but cannot dictate how the reader will respond to it because of the inevitable intrusion of personal expectations, experiences, associations, etc.

The 2 products in the film have left their blueprints behind to become part of the unsuccessful relationship Clint is having with his kin. As such the reacher and phone are no longer connected to how they came to be designed. It may be that the massive underutilization of accessible and usable products and features lies not in their inherent quality or applicability, but in the network of meanings attributed to them by users and others.

Assistance, whether delivered by an individual or by technology, need not stigmatize. That’s what universal/inclusive design is all about - design that is not only needed by people of all ages and abilities, but also desired, even coveted.

Thank you for this excellent essay; I plan to read it at a class I’m teaching tomorrow night about assistive technology and elders. A few savvy marketers have figured out that this is an issue and have designed campaigns accordingly; think The Gap ads for “easy-fit” rather than “middle-age-spread” jeans, and those annoying late-night ads for what are functionally low-end hearing aids but are promoted as ways to spy on your neighbors with “sonic hearing.” But ultimately, people with accessibility needs—like any consumer—will be more likely to accept products that, in the words of Pip Coburn, address a “crisis [that] is greater than the total perceived pain of [product] adoption.” IF using a cell phone were important to Clint (and that may be a big if for many Boomers/elders), and IF he were finding it frustrating to use his current phone, THEN he might just have not reacted by asking his benefactors if they “felt lucky.”

Now, if overall more products’ design included a modest amount of realization that people with a wide range of capabilities would be using them, this would be even less of an issue…

It is good to know that many projects are done by concerned individuals nowadays.This projects usually involved educating the poor using technology. However, they somehow fail to reach out to their target beneficiaries. This kinds of projects totally self destructs.The masses who needs it most are not able to afford the technology and in turn makes the product feasible only to a limited market.