Centering economic inclusion in policy for realizing disability rights in India

The impact of the coronavirus pandemic on persons with disabilities has laid bare the link between health and economic outcomes. This article reviews the legal and policy framework impacting economic outcomes for persons with disabilities in India against the backdrop of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) on poverty, economic growth, and productive employment. It offers a policy framework for realizing the human rights of persons with disabilities by advancing their inclusion in India's economic development. © 2023 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

Interview with Gerard Quinn

The Special Rapporteur position was created in the 1990s. I think the timing was significant, as it coincided with the enactment of the American Disabilities Act (ADA), which had a huge ripple effect around the world. It also coincided with a special resolution of the United Nations (UN) General Assembly on equal opportunities for persons with disabilities, which was a non-binding resolution. The Special Rapporteur position was set up around that time to answer to the Commission for Social Development, and the first mandate holder was Swedish: Mr Bengt Lindqvist.1 The fact that the Special Rapporteur was answerable to the Commission for Social Development somehow tells a lot, as it means it was not really anchored on the human rights side of the house, which only came later once the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)2 was adopted in 2006. As such, the Special Rapporteur position switched from the Commission for Social Development to the Human Rights Council. The first person appointed to the new mandate started in 2014, Mrs Catalina Devandas Aguilar3 (2014-2020). I am the second person appointed and I started in 2020, regrettably when COVID began. © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the ICRC.

The voice of the youths and young adults with epilepsy in Taiwan

Purpose: This report summarizes an innovative nationwide, Taiwan Youth with Epilepsy Summit on 2020-11-21 at Tainan. This conference was hosted by the Tainan Epilepsy Association. Method: The process of the initiation, design and training for the conference was reviewed. Parts of the conference will be demonstrated. Result: This innovative conference entitled Taiwan Youth with Epilepsy Summit was attended by the invited members of the deputy of Tainan City Mayor and her members, academic leaders in pediatric and adult epileptologists, medical sociologists, educational professionals. The other participants included social workers, medical professional, medical students and people with epilepsy and their care givers from 12 out of 16 organizations of people with epilepsy in Taiwan. In total 153 persons attended the meeting. This is the biggest gathering in Tainan during the COVID-19 era. Six youths and young adults with epilepsy on behalf of people with epilepsy and their caregivers were the speakers, I firstly addressed the relationship between “Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, CRPD) and epilepsy. The others proposed some urgent biopsychosocial care and human right needs related to education (one speaker), vocation (two speakers) and traffic regulation (two speakers). Although Taiwan is not a member country of the United Nations, Taiwan is the only country to legislate for the implementation of CRPD. This conference was prepared for the Taiwan State Party Report of implementing the UNs Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in the last 4 years. Conclusions: The new paradigm of protecting the human rights and dignity of persons with disability as a national strategy for social welfare created the opportunities of autonomous individuals to participate social policy they concerned. The intelligent youths and young adults with epilepsy in this conference demonstrated their altruistic heart and behavior.

Examining the role of governmsent in shaping disability inclusiveness around COVID-19: a framework analysis of Australian guidelines.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has uncovered the ways in which disabled people are made more vulnerable due to structural inequalities. These vulnerabilities are the result of the interaction between individual and structural factors that shape how risk is experienced by disabled people. In Australia, these vulnerabilities are influenced by the way disability services and care for disabled people are delivered through a consumer-directed approach. We analysed the policies and documentation made by the Australian Government and state and territory governments during the pandemic to explore whether these were disability-inclusive. We aimed to unpack how these policies shaped disabled people as vulnerable citizens. METHODS: Guided by documentary research, we used framework analysis to examine the policies of the Australian Government and state and territory governments. We analysed legislation that was given royal assent by the federal, state and territory governments, and documents (reports, fact sheets, guidance documents, etc.) published by the federal government and the state of Victoria (given that this state experienced the brunt of the epidemic in Australia) between February 2020 to August of 2020. RESULTS: We found that most of the resources were not aimed at disabled people, but at carers and workers within disability services. In addition, most policies formulated by the Australian Government were related to the expansion of welfare services and the creation of economic stimulus schemes. However, while the stimulus included unemployed people, the expansion of benefits explicitly excluded disabled people who were not employed. Most of the legislation and documents offered accessibility options, though most of these options were only available in English. Disability oriented agencies offered more extensive accessibility options. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate a large number of documents addressing the needs of disabled people. However, disability-inclusiveness appeared to be inconsistent and not fully considered, leaving disabled people exposed to greater risk of COVID-19. Neoliberal policies in the health and welfare sector in Australia have led to an individualisation of the responsibility to remain healthy and a reliance on people as independent consumers. Governments need to take a clear stance towards the emergence of such a discourse that actively disvalues disabled people.

Disability inclusiveness of government responses to COVID-19 in South America: a framework analysis study.

BACKGROUND: Disabled people are particularly exposed to the risks of COVID-19, as well as to the measures taken to address it, and their impact. The aim of the study was to examine the disability-inclusiveness of government responses to COVID-19 in four South American Countries: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Peru. METHODS: We conducted documentary research, using framework analysis to analyse reports, legislation, decrees, and other official documents that communicated measures taken in response to the pandemic, published from February 1st until May 22nd, 2020. We included documents reporting measures that affected disabled people either directly (measures specifically designed for disabled people) or indirectly (measures for the general population). We developed an analytical framework based on recommendations for disability-inclusive response to COVID-19 published by the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Carribean, the World Health Organisation, and other international organisations. RESULTS: We analysed 72 documents. The findings highlight that while some positive measures were taken, the needs of disabled people were not fully considered. Several countries published recommendations for a disability-inclusive response to COVID-19, without ensuring their translation to practice. All countries took at least some steps to ensure access to financial support, health, and education for disabled people, but at the same time they also implemented policies that had a detrimental impact on disabled people. The populations that are most exposed to the impacts of COVID-19, including disabled people living in institutional care, were protected in several cases only by recommendations rather by legislation. CONCLUSIONS: This study illustrates how the official government responses taken by four countries in the region - while positive, in several aspects - do not fully address the needs of disabled people, thus further disadvantaging them. In order to ensure response to COVID - 19 is disability inclusive, it is necessary to translate recommendations to practice, consider disabled people both in mainstream policy and in disability-specific measures, and focus on the long-term reconstruction phase.