Resources search

Purpose: People with intellectual disabilities are deeply affected by health inequity, which is also reflected in their access to and use of assistive technology (AT). Including the perspectives of adults with intellectual disabilities and their caregivers, together with the views of local health professionals, suppliers of AT and policy-makers, this paper aims to provide an overview of factors influencing access to AT and its use by people with intellectual disabilities in Bangalore, a southern region of India.

Method: Face-to-face interviews were conducted with 15 adults with intellectual disabilities (ranging from mild to profound) and their caregivers, and with 16 providers of AT. This helped to gain insight into the current use, needs, knowledge, awareness, access, customisation, funding, follow-up, social inclusion, stigma and policies around AT and intellectual disability.

Results: Access to AT was facilitated by community fieldworkers and services to reach out and identify people with intellectual disabilities. Important barriers were stigma, and lack of knowledge and awareness among parents. Factorsrelated to continued use were the substantial dependence on the care system to use AT, and the importance of AT training and instructions for the user and the care system.

Conclusion and Implications: The barriers and facilitators related to AT for people with intellectual disabilities differ from other populations in need. The findings of this study can be used to inform and adjust country policies and frameworks whose aim is to improve access to AT and enhance the participation of people with intellectual disabilities within their communities.

Humanity & Inclusion inclusive governance approach fits in with the governments (national, regional and local) context, governments are in charge of the response to the crisis. In these types of contexts, humanitarian actors do not have the leadership and mandate to make decisions. Governments are creating policies in response to Covid-19 and must include persons with disabilities as equal citizens within their response frameworks. 

Key messages :

• DO NO HARM: Protect yourself and your family, staff, partners and of course the beneficiaries.
• Work closely with other stakeholders and ensure coordination in the response is happening at all levels
• Follow HI’s guidelines and the guidance from the national and local authorities regarding COVID 19 at all times. 

English pages 1-7 and français ci-dessous pages 7-13.

With inclusive research being an emerging field of interest, there is growing recognition that establishing collaborative relationships between researchers with and without ID entails specific demands. However, since studies on collaboration in inclusive research merely provide individual reports on experiences and challenges in one particular research project, building a shared knowledge base of concrete competencies considered important for those involved merits attention. This study contributes to a shared knowledge base in asking people with and without ID with (experiential) knowledge of inclusive research for competencies they consider important in collaborating in inclusive research in general, that is, without reference to a specific research project they participated in. Researchers with and without ID, coaches, policy makers, and teachers involved in the education of people with ID participated in this study. Data were collected from a focus group, individual interviews, and expert meetings. Qualitative analysis was carried out

immediately after each moment of data collection, providing the use of increasing insights in each consecutive phase of data collection. Participants describe that establishing collaborative relationships between researchers with and without ID in inclusive research requires the commitment of both parties. They mentioned concrete competencies they consider important for people with and without ID to collaborate in inclusive research in the categories: building a mutual relationship, communicating, achieving a collaboration in which everyone involved can contribute, being aware of skills and developmental needs, and being aware of impact. Clearly, describing competencies for people with and without ID is not intended to exclude anyone who does not possess these competencies from collaboration in inclusive research. However to avoid “tokenism,” this study might contribute to effective participation of people with ID in inclusive research in providing concrete competencies considered important in collaboration.

"This MessageBrief summarises and comments on the framing strategies currently in use to communicate information about disability and human rights. The recommendations presented here are based on framing “best practices,” gleaned from more than 15 years of communications research on a wide range of social issues, and represent important opportunities for disability rights advocates to communicate more effectively". This brief reviews more than 55 communications materials sampled from 20 organisations involved in the disability rights field. Five primary framing strategies: Unframed Facts and Numbers, Description Instead of Explanation, Problems Without Solutions, Crisis Stories, and Vivid Cases in current communications are identified and 8 recommendations are presented. Gaps in existing research precluding the ability to make more specific reframing recommendations are identified.

Background: Persons with disability run the danger of not profiting from the development process due to exclusion from basic services and opportunities. Still, the knowledge base on exclusion mechanisms is relatively weak and there is a danger that important aspects are not addressed as they are hidden behind established understandings that are not critically scrutinised.

Objectives: The main purpose of this article was to highlight critical thoughts on prevailing knowledge of the relationship between disability and poverty, the policy base for addressing the rights of persons with disability, and culture as a key component in continued discrimination.

Method: This article aimed at integrating three papers on the above topics presented at the 2011 African Network for Evidence-to-Action on Disability (AfriNEAD) Symposium. The researchers have therefore thoroughly examined and questioned the relationship between disability and poverty, the influence of policy on action, and the role of culture in reproducing injustice.

Results: The article firstly claims that there are limitations in current data collection practice with regards to analysing the relationship between poverty and disability. Secondly, ambitions regarding inclusion of persons with disability in policy processes as well as in implementation of policies are not necessarily implemented in an optimal way. Thirdly, negative aspects of culture in discrimination and bad treatment of disabled need to be highlighted to balance the discussion on disability and culture.

Conclusion: A critical view of prevailing understandings of disability and development is key to producing the knowledge necessary to eradicate poverty amongst persons with disability and other vulnerable groups. Not only do we need research that is actually designed to reveal the mechanisms behind the disability–poverty relationship, we need research that is less tied up with broad political agreements that is not necessarily reflecting the realities at ground level.

In Disability Studies the evolution of conceptual models is often portrayed as linear, with a nineteenth-century charity model shifting to the medical model that dominated disability discourse in the twentieth century. This is then assumed to be largely unchallenged until the 1970s, when an emergent Disability Rights Movement re-framed issues into the social model, from which evolved a rights-based model. This paper documents two early efforts to address disability issues submitted to the League of Nations: the Crippled Child’s Bill of Rights in 1931 and a ‘Memorial’ requesting the establishment of an International Bureau of Information on Crippled Children in 1929. Neither submission achieved its stated goals, yet both reflect early attempts to place disability within wider social contexts.

The legal analysis of the draft convention text Comprehensive and Integral International Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities is an exellent document explaining and commenting on the convention text. This document addresses both legal experts and people who need legal background information about the convention