Not too far back in history we have the example of Kaiser Wilhelm of Germany. As eldest son he was in line to inherit power. However, he was born with a birth defect (apparently an accident of birth--severing ligaments so that one arm did not function properly and the muscles atrophied as he grew), which was not only regarded as a mark of shame on his family, but also a blot on the royal line (at that point Victoria had managed to get her children married into all the crown families of Europe). Apparently the family went through a lot of chicanery to ensure that all portraits camouflaged the defect through angles and poses. But they also employed some really horrendous "cures" such as laying on of fresh animal hearts to boost "healing," and hours spent in an iron device intended to prevent the neck and spine from curving towards the weak side.
I just note this as all of this was carried out by presumably sane and caring people (parents and others) of another century not too far removed from ours.
I don't suggest that anything in relation to Sherin's abuse derived from sanity or caring and responsible adults. Nor do I think the lack of portraits on display had anything to do with her eye. Just to point out that we (Westerners of this century) are not all that far removed from the kind of thinking that in India plays out as rejection of disabled (or differently abled) persons. It is only in my lifetime (and I'm not that old) that the ADA has brought about some parity for many in the workplace.
