| IDS Home | Course Descriptions | IDS Concentration | Student Projects |

Interdisciplinary Disability Studies (IDS)

To listen to this paper, click on the control bar below.

Are Nations United Around Disability?

By: Scott Clement and Barbara Vittum

Supporting Principle

Persons with disabilities are entitled to exercise their civil, political, social, economic and cultural rights.

Background and Rationale of the UN Response

Because a single definition of disability does not exist, prevalence rates, opportunities and inclusion for those with disabilities are vague. Prevalence rates which vary from 5 to 20% depend on the cultural context of the population, and varying methodologies used.

Further contributing to the confusion about the nature and magnitude of disability are the multiple theoretical models that have been developed in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, indicting social, political, cultural, economic factors rather than embodied medical anomalies, as causative of disability (DePoy & Gilson, 2004; Loeb, Eide, and Mont, 2007).

Socio-cultural and economic differences not only affect how disability is defined, but how scarce resources are distributed. (Albrecht, Devlieger, and Geert van Hove, 2007).

It is estimated that 10% of the world's population is medically disabled. 1 in 10 will have mental, sensory or some type of embodied impairment.

Millions with embodied conditions are disabled by extreme exclusion and systemic barriers to political/economic and socio-cultural advantages.

Cultural domination and social patterns of disrespect and marginalization have deprived medically disabled people from full participation in the labor market (Parker, 2006).

Embodied disability is both a cause and consequence of poverty, causing profound negative effects on humans, especially in poor developing nations where resources are scarce. Some 3.3 billion people live on less than $2.00 a day; as a result of poverty. Poverty results in poor nutrition causing ill health and embodied disability, may expose one to unsafe environments, and severely limits access to basics necessities, including health care. Poor health and disability extend their negative reach way beyond the health sector to economic development and trade, and environmental concerns. Costs in human lives and potential from poverty and disability strain economies of developing nations, creating a vicious cycle (Landry, Dyck, and Raman, 2007).

Many women are discriminated against both for their embodied disability and their gender, having less access to education, health care, and employment ("Human Rights & Persons with Disabilities," 2002).

Abuse is common against women and girls with embodied disabilities. It is believed that 30% of youth living on the streets have a disability ("Factsheet on Persons with Disabilities," 2007).

In India, a disproportionately large number of women and girls with embodied disabilities are beaten in the home, 25% of the women with intellectual disabilities have been raped, and another 6% forcibly sterilized. Additionally, 90% of children with disabilities in developing countries do not attend school (Henderson, 2006).

A "one culture fits all policy" clouds the understanding of the issues. Many who are labeled disabled do not consider themselves as such. Cultural and environmental barriers are experienced differently; disparities in norms and laws responding to disability differ across cultures; and socioeconomic class is an indicator of access to care (Albrecht, Devlieger, and Geert van Hove, 2007).

History of UN Response to Disability

1940's and 1950's: UN focused on rights of those with physical disabilities via social welfare.

1960's: Fundamental reevaluation of rights and policies was coupled with initiatives within the disability community.

1970's: Brought concern for more specific protection in two declarations addressing both disability and mental retardation.

1980's: Disability-specific international instruments were developed; global experts reviewed the implementation of a World Programme of Action, shifting from social welfare to promotion of equal social and economic opportunity. No consensus was reached on a legally binding instrument, since it was felt existing human rights instruments would cover those with disabilities.

1990's: Non-Binding agreement was reached. Economic and Social Council elaborated Standard Rules on Equalization of Opportunities for Disabled, addressing policy design and evaluation, technical and economic cooperation, comparative study of policies and programs within the international community, and development of action plans.

2000's: Brought an examination of progress in and obstacles to implementing a Programme of Action. The international community sought to combat poverty and social exclusion, establishing a Special Committee to promote and protect rights and dignity of persons with disabilities ("Human Rights of Persons with Disabilities," 2002).

Current Instruments

Three separate binding instruments protect women, children, and people with disabilities as a result of war.

Children specific instruments involve children in armed conflicts, child prostitution and pornography, and slavery.

Unlike these international legal instruments, disability-specific instruments have been adopted as resolutions, normative guidelines and declarations by the UN General Assembly but are not legally binding.

Criticism

Advances

The UN instruments are shifting from the original embodied explanation for disability to a broader conceptualization that locates disability in the domain of abrogation of human rights.

The global scope of the UN policy demonstrates support throughout the world for equality of human rights.

The UN policy has the potential of raising international awareness of disabling factors and of furthering human rights for all people including those with diverse disabling circumstances.

Limitations

The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities opened for ratification 3/30/07, while a step forward, is not legally binding and there is no enforcement mechanism, even though it is estimated 600 million are disabled worldwide and that fewer than 50 countries have anti-discrimination laws in place.

A policy is only as good as its enforcement and only if it is legally binding.

International policies are difficult to monitor.

Human rights language is often persuasive in the abstract but lacks substantive content. Certain terms that are at the heart of the policy are often undefined. This vagueness leaves definitions open for differential interpretation based upon a State's laws and culture. Stein (2007) states: "States short of funds are more likely to implement rights that are either easier to achieve or are perceived as having greater utility or political cachet. Conversely, States are less likely to promote rights where realization is thought either more challenging, less encompassing, or out of political favor" (p. 98).

Those countries with anti-discrimination mandates, primarily wealthy, developed nations, have instituted laws but do not provide a legal aid process to enact the law.

UN instruments have not adequately promoted full or equal participation.

Instruments that comprise the International Bill of Human Rights do not specify disability as a protected category. Reichert (2007) states: "Although member states of the UN work together to draft these documents, the enforcement of human rights generally remains within the individual countries. The United States or any other country can choose to promote a particular human right and ignore others" (p. 9).

References

Albrecht, G.L., Devlieger, P., & van Hove, G. (2007). The experience of disability in plural societies. European Journal of Disability Research. Retrieved on February 19, 2008, from http://www.sciencedirect.com.prxy4.ursus.maine.edu/science?_ob=A...

Donoghue, C. (2003). Challenging the authority of the medical definition of disability: An analysis of the resistance to the social constructionist paradigm. Disability & Soceity, 18(2), 199-208.

Gilson, S.F. & DePoy, E. (in press). Explanatory legitimacy: A model for disability policy development and analysis. In I. Colby (Ed.), Social Policy and Policy Practice. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

Henderson, H. (2006, August 12). Think you know the score on disabilities? Toronto Star, pp. L04.

Landry, M., Dyck, T., & Raman, S. (2007). Poverty, disability and human development: a global challenge for physiotherapy in the 21 51 Century. Physiotherapy, 93(4), 233-234.

Loeb, M.E., Eide, A.H., & Mont, D. (2007). Approaching the measurement of disability prevalence: The case of Zambia. European Journal of Disability Research. Retrieved on February 19, 2008, from http://www.sciencedirect.com.prxy4.ursus.maine.edu/science?_ob=A...

Mercer, S.W. & MacDonald, R. (2007). Disability and human rights. The Lancet, 370(9587), 548-549.

Parker, S. (2006). International justice: The United Nations, human rights, and disability. Journal of Comparative Social Welfare, 22(1), 63-78.

Reichert, E. (2007). Human rights in the twenty-first century: Creating a new paradigm for social work. In Elisabeth Reichert (Ed.), Challenge in human rights: A social work perspective (pp. 1-13). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

Stein, M.A. (2007). Disability human rights. California Law Revue, 95(75),75-121.

United Nations. (2007). Factsheet on persons with disabilities. Retrieved February 18, 2008, from http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?id=18.

United Nations. (2007). Map of signatures and ratifications as of 21 February 2008. Retrieved February 25, 2008 from http://www.un.org/disabilities/documents/maps/map11 0208.jpg

United Nations. (2002). Human rights of persons with disabilities. Retrieved February 18, 2008 from http://www.un.org/esalsocdev/enable/rights/humanrights.htm.

This map represents participating and nonparticipating countries in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and its Optional Protocol (2007).

Return to IDS Student Projects 2008 index

| IDS Home | Course Descriptions | IDS Concentration | Student Projects |