It's often said that the mark of a civilised society is how it treats its most vulnerable citizens in times of austerity. And in the past week, Britain has proved itself quite not so. Last Thursday a United Nations inquiry into disability rights in the UK ruled that the government is failing in its duties in everything from education, work and housing to health, transport and social security. Presented with overwhelming evidence of a range of regressive policies and multibillion-pound cuts to disability services, it described the treatment of disabled people in this country as a " human catastrophe " . Less than 24 hours later, Luke Davey lost his appeal against his local council cutting his care package almost in half. Luke is quadriplegic, has cerebral palsy and is registered blind. But in this climate of cuts to disability services, after 23 years of 24/7 support, his care hours have been suddenly gutted. Without enough funding for full-time personal assistants, his mother, Jasmine, is forced to fill in the gaps: sitting in the bungalow to ensure he's not alone, and lifting her 14-stone son into a hoist. Jasmine, it's worth noting, is 75 and has cancer. Bit by bit, the abuse of disabled people in Britain is being normalised. This isn't simply the result of newspapers and politicians dehumanising the "scrounging" disabled. It's that the hardship being witnessed is now so common, so widespread, it's as if it's not worth comprehension. Resisting this becomes almost an act of defiance: to say that it's not normal for a self-proclaimed global leader of disability rights to have to be shamed publicly by the United Nations over its treatment of disabled citizens; that it's not economically necessary for one of the wealthiest nations on Earth to cut benefits and social care so deeply that disabled people are housebound, hungry, or suicidal. When the " most vulnerable citizens " line is used by well-meaning voices, there's a secret second sentence that's rarely uttered: disabled people, truth be told, do not need to be vulnerable. Contrary to the myth sold by years of austerity, to be afraid, desperate or isolated is not a normal state of affairs for people with disabilities. Vulnerability comes when politicians choose to pull the support disabled people need in order to live dignified, fulfilling, independent lives—knowing full well the misery it will cause.

单选题 The UN described the treatment of disabled people in the UK as a "human catastrophe" because______.

【正确答案】 C

【答案解析】解析：细节题。由关键词human catastrophe定位到第二段最后一句：“压倒性的证据表明，英国采取了一系列倒退政策，并且在残疾人服务上削减数十亿英镑的支出，联合国表示在这个国家的残疾人的待遇是‘人类灾难’。”本题问的是原因，Presented with…这一分词结构充当了原因状语，由此可知，联合国之所以表示在这个国家的残疾人的待遇是“人类灾难”，是因为[C]“在紧缩时期，政府大幅削减了对残疾人的财政支持”。[A]“残疾人受到教育、工作、住房等各个方面的歧视”，文中是说政府在教育、工作、住房等各个方面工作做的不到位，没有提到残疾人在这些方面受到歧视；[B]“当地法院偏袒政府，卢克-戴维输掉了他反对政府的上诉”答非所问；[D]“残疾人不能独立生活和工作”，文中没有提及。

单选题 The example of Luke Davey is used to show that______.

【正确答案】 D

【答案解析】解析：细节题。由关键词Luke Davey定位到第三段，第三段主要讲了卢克-戴维这位残疾人在政府补助削减后的悲惨生活，故答案选[D]“残疾人现在生活在一个灾难性的环境中”。[A]“残疾人可以依靠他们的家庭成员来支持他们”，作者不支持这种做法；[B]“残疾人应该得到更好的工作机会和薪水”，没有提到；[C]“残疾人在英国法院没有受到公平对待”，概括片面。

单选题 The underlined sentence "Bit by bit, the abuse of disabled people in Britain is being normalised" implies that______.

【正确答案】 C

【答案解析】解析：判断推理题。划线句是段落主题句，可结合本段后面的阐述来理解划线句。后文主要讲了两层意思，一是媒体和政客不顾残疾人的境地，二是整个社会大环境对于残疾人的痛苦司空见惯。可以推知，主题句的含义是[C]“社会对残疾人的苦难漠不关心”。[A]“社会不允许残疾人进入公共场所”，[B]“社会不重视残疾人的努力”和[D]“社会实行严格的法律反对家庭暴力”，均不符合文意。

单选题 What does the author think about the "most vulnerable citizens" line?

【正确答案】 B

【答案解析】解析：细节题。作者在说到most vulnerable citizens时，表示还有另一种声音没有发出，也就是作者也赞同的观点：“残疾人并不脆弱，当政治家们明知后果，但还是选择剥夺能使残疾人生活得更有尊严、有满足感、更独立的帮助时，脆弱性就出现了。”选项[B]“如果残疾人得到适当的支持，他们就不会脆弱”符合。[A]“残疾人总是害怕、绝望或孤独”与作者表述相反；[C]“残疾人有太多的事情需要担心”，没有提到；[D]“残疾人对政客的依赖使他们易受伤害”，没有提到。