In all the stuff I’m reading about for the movie Murderball, there is a lot of mentions of quadriplegic rugby.
Every cite I can find (and the dictionary) says that quadriplegic is “one affected with paralysis of both arms and legs” (m-w.com) The men in this movie are, in my understanding, paraplegic, or paralyzed in both legs, but with movement in the arms and upper body. One website mentioned that quadriplegia comes most often from spinal cord injuries above a certain vertebrae, and para from below that.
Is quadriplegia a matter of degree? I thought that was the whole point of having a distinction between quad and para.
Paraplegia generally means no loss of use of the arms whereas quadriplegia means anything from partial loss of functioning in the arms (and legs) to total loss. People often think that qaudriplegia means only total loss of arm function, which is incorrect.
Actually, I think so, and I’ve also been asking myself this question recently. I seem to remember a handicapped athlete, a few years ago, who seemed like a regular paraplegic to me, but apparently he was actually quadriplegic, could therefore race with other quadriplegics, and since it wasn’t too pronounced, he was often winning. It was a long time ago, so I may have forgotten a few details or important parts.
So yes, my wager would be that quadriplegia is a matter of degree, with slight quadriplegia almost undistinguishable from paraplegia by the layman, but I’m not a doctor or anything of the sort.
If I’m not mistaken, John Callahan, the cartoonist, is a quadraplegic. His hands still work, but not as well as before his accident. He started selling cartoons after his accident, IIRC from his autobio. His cartooning style, by the way, isn’t a result of his quadraplegia. He says he’s done some “technical” drawing that is very straighforward illustration-type stuff. His cartoons are skewed and blobby because that’s his chosen style.