I recently came across a video promoting the new adaptation of Roald Dahl’s book, The Twits. It featured Greg James and Chris Smith discussing how they might go about creating the most “revolting” character. The illustrator asks them if they'd like a glass eye to be included, to which James and Smith respond, “A glass eye! She needs a glass eye. That's it. What a disgusting pair of twits!”.

Immediately I was taken aback – first that the video was able to be published, and secondly that at no point during the planning and execution did anyone stop to think about how harmful that messaging could be to people using a prosthetic eye, and how it might contribute to stigma around disability.

The literature we give young people is incredibly influential, it can shape their world view, for better or for worse. When writers use a glass eye as a signifier of something disgusting, what kind of message does this promote to young readers about prosthetic eyes?

Children deserve so much more than writing which is at best poorly researched, out of touch, and lazy, and at worst, callous and deliberately stigmatising.

The Royal National Institute of Blind People (RNIB) released a statement about the video, saying, “When there's positive representation of disabilities in children's books, children with disabilities feel seen and heard, and their friends and classmates treat everyone the same. There is nothing at all revolting about prosthetic eyes, we think they're brilliant.”

READ MORE LENNIE PENNIE

Coeliac disease isn’t a fad, or a preference, it’s a serious condition

Lennie Pennie calls for criminal justice system to put victims first

Not having disabled children in mind when discussing disabled characters – or indeed any characters at all – is part of........

© Herald Scotland