Daily Times

The word disability — a connotation of impairment — is a social construct. Embedded in the term ‘Persons with Disabilities (PWDs)’, disability carries two faces: one is put on by the disabled whereas the other is donned by society. Whereas the genetic and acquired aspects of impairment may render a person unable to live life fully, the ignorance and indifference aspects of understanding (or practice) render a society unable to allow its PWDs live to the fullest. Similarly, whereas PWDs share the genetic or acquired aspect of disability, society shares the incapacity aspect of disability by its failure in either forestalling the disability crisis or in ameliorating the condition of PWDs. Hence, the role of society is found to be two-pronged: prevention and mitigation.
Society can preclude disabilities of its members — the would-be PWDs — by making its members take precautionary measures. That is, society can alert its members to take measures to save their progeny from prospective disabilities. For instance, awareness about genetic health can be raised to forestall the diseases (such as those related to blood and metabolic pathologies) which follow cousin marriages. Similarly, awareness about the marriage age can be amplified to discourage late-age pregnancies to lower the incidence of the birth of abnormal twins and the babies suffering from Down’s syndrome. Social pressure can be mounted to persuade families to introduce polio drops to their new born babies to circumvent the crippling of limbs eternally.
Society can mitigate disabilities by urging its members to proffer space (or enabling environment) to PWDs for an honourable existence. Unfortunately, society imposes (or reinforces) disability on PWDs by introducing barriers of various types to the person’s habilitation (integration) or rehabilitation (reintegration) efforts and this is done by resorting to name calling, discrimination (both direct and indirect), intimidation, abuse, exploitation, violence and even blunt rejection. Receptivity and tolerance of society are important for the stigma-free existence of PWDs, so that they can enjoy their share of life and contribute their part towards society, even if their presence were to introduce diversity to society. Society can impose a convention on itself not to be a contributor to the problems of PWDs and not to violate the supposed or prescribed limits of decency and equality. The improved version of mitigation is called inclusion and leads to the concept of an inclusive society, a society which gives PWDs full membership and offers all chances of independence.
If the state is considered the executive and legislative face of society, which it is, the state is also responsible for the disability of a citizen. It is because, even after experiencing the stacking up of the disabled, if the state does not set up appropriate safeguards to forestall the disability of those who will arrive later, the state is underperforming. The safeguards can be in the form of either taking preventive measures at health and societal levels or enacting and implementing legislations at the provincial and national levels. If taken promptly, these measures bear the potential of minimising the incidence of disability, if not eliminating it absolutely. Similarly, the state can play its legislative and executing role to materialise the concept of inclusive society.
Pakistan woke up to the disability crisis in 1981 — the year proclaimed by the United Nations (UN) as the International Year of Disability — and passed the Disabled Persons (Employment and Rehabilitation) Ordinance, which focused primarily on employment and special (segregated) education of the disabled. In 2002, Pakistan formulated the National Policy for Persons with Disabilities to meet the target of access, inclusion and equalisation of opportunities for PWDs (which made up 2.49% of Pakistan’s total population of 132 million, as per 1998 census) on a five year basis by the year 2025. For the effective implementation of the policy, Pakistan formulated the National Plan of Action in March 2006. However, in December 2006, the UN adopted the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) which became operational in 2008. The CRPD focused on the rights-based approach to mainstreaming PWDs and forsook the term “disabled persons” (as also mentioned in the title of the 1981 Ordinance) for the term “persons with disabilities” (PWDs).
The 18th Constitutional Amendment was passed in 2010 and the powers to formulate policies and frame legislation were devolved to the provinces. In 2011, Pakistan ratified the CRPD and thereby accepted the legal obligation of adopting and implementing it through legislation. Recently, the provinces of Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhawa (KP) have tried to adopt the 1981 Ordinance after introducing a few amendments to it. However, no effort has been made by any provinces to legislate consistent with the CRPD. According to the Report on Disabilities compiled by the World Health Organisation (WHO) in 2011, 15% of the world population is PWDs, including those affected by aging and chronic ailments. If 15% population of Pakistan (which is about 192 million in 2015) is also considered consisting of PWDs — though this analogy can be debated — the enormity of the disability crisis is self-evident.
Disability cannot be seen in isolation from society. Disability is potent enough to fracture a society into two halves: the capable half and the disabled half. In a society wherein the strife between the strong and the weak favours the strong, the disabled half of society cannot find succour. In such a case, the state’s intervention is required. The sections of society which are reluctant to understand the extension in the concept of normal to embrace human diversity (in the form of disability) can be swayed to understand the same through the force of law.
Unfortunately, the state, for instance, the state of Pakistan, legislates hurriedly and smoothly to protect the rights of its members — the snuggle for existence — who are not considered PWDs but the state delays legislation, not to say of its implementation, when it were to protect the rights of its members who are considered PWDs. In this way, the state itself is guilty of discriminating against its citizens and it deters PWDs from becoming its full citizens.

The writer is a freelance columnist and can be reached at qaisarrashid@yahoo.com