Resources search

This article aims to reorient thinking about the relationship between the long-standing social model of disability and the rapidly emerging human rights model. In particular, it contests the influential view that the latter develops and improves upon the former (the improvement thesis) and argues instead that the two models are complementary (the complementarity thesis). The article begins with a discursive analysis of relevant documents to investigate how each of the two models has been used in the crafting and monitoring of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. This highlights the increasing importance of the human rights model in this policy context. It also provides examples of the operation of the two models which inform the remainder of the discussion. We then critique the comparisons between the models which underpin the improvement thesis; and, drawing on Foucault’s technologies of power and Beckett and Campbell’s ‘oppositional device’ methodology, deepen and develop this comparative analysis. The result, we argue, is that the two models have different subjects and different functions. In the human rights context, their roles are complementary and supportive.

Purpose: Although measuring outcome of rehabilitation in children with Developmental Coordination Disorder is considered important no consensus exists on which instruments to use. An important attribute of a measurement instrument would be that it is sensitive to clinical changes. The aim of this prospective, observational study was therefore to investigate the responsiveness of six potentially suitable instruments.

Methods: Forty-one children (34 boys, median age 7.8 years, Inter Quartile Range: 7.2–9.2) receiving multidisciplinary rehabilitation treatment for Developmental Coordination Disorder were included (mean treatment time: 32.8 h, Standard Deviation 7.3). The following instruments were applied before and after rehabilitation: Movement-Assessment-Battery-Children-2 (MABC-2), Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), Systematic detection writing problems (SOS-2-NL), DCD-daily, Behaviour Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF), and TNO-AZL children’s Quality of Life questionnaire (TACQOL)). Change-scores (paired t-test/Wilcoxon-test) and responsiveness (Effect-sizes and Standardized-Response-Means) were calculated.

Results: Significant differences over time were found for the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure, DCDdaily and Movement-Asessment-Battery-Children-2 (p < 0.05). The responsiveness of these instruments was moderate-high (Canadian Occupational Performance Measure-performance Effect-Size:1.70/Standardized-Response-Mean:1.81, Canadian Occupational Performance Measure-satisfaction Effect-Size:1.65/Standardized-Response-Mean 1.53; DCDdaily-total-score Effect-Size:0.40/Standardized-Response-Mean:0.62, DCDdaily-Quality-score Effect-Size:0.74/Standardized-Response-Mean:0.89, DCDdaily-time-score Effect-Size:0.21/Standardized-Response-Mean:0.43; MABC-2-total-score Effect-Size:0.42/Standardized-Response-Mean:0.43, MABC-2-Ball-skills-score Effect-Size:0.33/Standardized-Response-Mean:0.36). Systematic detection of writing problems (SOS-2-NL), Behaviour Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) and TNO-AZL children’s Quality of Life questionnaire (TACQOL) were not responsive to change.

Conclusion: Although the Movement-Assessment-Battery-Children-2 test is the most widely used instrument when measuring rehabilitation outcome in Developmental Coordination Disorder, the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure and DCDdaily seem to be more responsive and constitute a valuable addition.

PURPOSE: Worldwide, disability systems are moving away from congregated living towards individualized models of housing. Individualized housing aims to provide choice regarding living arrangements and the option to live in houses in the community, just like people without disability. The purpose of this scoping review was to determine what is currently known about outcomes associated with individualized housing for adults with disability and complex needs.

METHODS: Five databases were systematically searched to find studies that reported on outcomes associated with individualized housing for adults (aged 18–65 years) with disability and complex needs.

RESULTS: Individualized housing was positively associated with human rights (i.e., self-determination, choice and autonomy) outcomes. Individualized housing also demonstrated favourable outcomes in regards to domestic tasks, social relationships, challenging behaviour and mood. However, outcomes regarding adaptive behaviour, self-care, scheduled activities and safety showed no difference, or less favourable results, when compared to group homes.

CONCLUSIONS: The literature indicates that individualized housing has favourable outcomes for people with disability, particularly for human rights. Quality formal and informal supports were identified as important for positive outcomes in individualized housing. Future research should use clear and consistent terminology and longitudinal research methods to investigate individualized housing outcomes for people with disability.

This situational analysis (SITAN) addresses the question: “what is the current situation in relation to formal sector employment for persons with disabilities in Kenya?”. It has been prepared for the Inclusion Works programme (which works on disability inclusive formal employment in Bangladesh, Kenya, Nigeria and Uganda), to better understand the current context and available evidence in Kenya, and will be helpful for anyone interested in disability inclusion, especially in relation to employment, in Kenya. It focuses on persons with disabilities, employers, policy, the disability movement, and partnerships. This SITAN has been briefly updated from the June 2019 SITAN.

The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the UK government or members of the Inclusion Works consortium.

This situational analysis (SITAN) addresses the question: “what is the current situation in relation to formal sector employment for persons with disabilities in Nigeria?”. It has been prepared for the Inclusion Works programme (which works on disability inclusive formal employment in Bangladesh, Kenya, Nigeria and Uganda), to better understand the current context and available evidence in Nigeria, and will be helpful for anyone interested in disability inclusion, especially in relation to employment. It focuses on persons with disabilities, employers, policy, the disability movement, and partnerships.

The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the UK government or members of the Inclusion Works consortium.

This situational analysis (SITAN) addresses the question: “what is the current situation for persons with disabilities in Nepal?”. It has been prepared for the Disability Inclusive Development programme (which works on access to education, jobs, healthcare, and reduced stigma and discrimination for persons with disabilities in Bangladesh, Jordan, Kenya, Nepal, Nigeria, and Tanzania), to better understand the current context, including COVID-19, and available evidence in Nepal. It will be helpful for anyone interested in disability inclusion in Nepal, especially in relation to stigma, employment, education, health, and humanitarian issues. This SITAN has been briefly updated from the April 2019 SITAN.

This situational analysis (SITAN) addresses the question: “what is the current situation for persons with disabilities in Bangladesh?”. It has been prepared for the Disability Inclusive Development programme (which works on access to education, jobs, healthcare, and reduced stigma and discrimination for persons with disabilities in Bangladesh, Jordan, Kenya, Nepal, Nigeria, and Tanzania), to better understand the current context, including COVID-19, and available evidence in Bangladesh. It will be helpful for anyone interested in disability inclusion in Bangladesh, especially in relation to stigma, employment, education, health, and humanitarian issues.

Question & problem

The COVID-19 pandemic and strategies essential for its containment are resulting in severe strains on economies, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). These impacts will be felt most by groups already in or at risk of poverty, including the estimated 1 billion people with disabilities globally. Interventions to address the short- and long-term economic effects of the pandemic are urgently needed. Some countries have begun implementing or announced plans for interventions addressing the economic impacts of COVID-19, such as food assistance, emergency cash transfers, unemployment assistance or expansions to existing social protection programmes. As these programmes are developed, it is important to consider the extent to which their design and delivery is inclusive of people with disabilities. Failure to adequately include people with disabilities in this process will lead to widening inequalities.

The on-going struggles of disability movements worldwide have been examined from multiple perspectives. As of yet, however, research into this topic has largely overlooked experiences on the African continent. This article seeks to address this gap by presenting a case study of the disability movement in Sierra Leone, West Africa. The study finds that on the one hand the Sierra Leonean disability movement is fragmented (referring to the tendency of groups to work individually as opposed to operating in a collective manner), thus limiting synergy. Three main ‘centrifugal’ forces underlying fragmentation are identified: resource scarcity, impairment specific interests and capacity differences between impairment types. On the other hand, the movement somehow manages to survive and even achieve modest successes. The research shows that interdependence, shared experiences of marginalization, and a clear identification of the ‘other’ have a unifying effect.

• The disability movement in Sierra Leone is fragmented, meaning it struggles to formulate a unified position and act collectively, yet somehow survives and even manages to achieve some successes;
• The fragmentation is fueled by competition between groups, a hierarchy between impairment types and interests that are impairment specific.
• The movement is kept together by mutual dependence to achieve key goals and raise funds, shared experiences of marginalization and negative experiences with ‘outsiders’.
• The research offers recommendations to disability groups and donors to mitigate fragmenting forces while strengthening unifying forces.