The word disability is a social construct while impairment can be called a medical construct. The existence or appearance of an impairment leads to a disability. The intensity of impairment determines the intensity of the consequent disability and the reciprocal chances of recovery. Some persons are born with impairments while some persons acquire them later on in life. An impairment leading to a disability becomes a point of concern when it hinders one from living a normal life for a long time. The improved version of the term persons with disabilities (PWDs) may be persons with impairments (PWIs), at the suggestive level. For the sake of understanding, impairment can be divided into two broader halves: mental and physical. Mental impairments (both genetic and acquired in origin) include sensory, motor, intellectual and psychiatric. The stretch of this definition also embraces impairments related to the eyes, ears and tongue, for being a mix of motor and sensory in nature. However, physical impairments (both genetic and acquired in origin) include organic, that is both internal and external organs including body limbs. Sometimes, there appears a multiple disorder (or a syndrome) constituting a blend of these broad or narrowed divisions of impairment. The term rehabilitation of PWDs is safely translated into reintegration of PWDs. In this meaning, the word rehabilitation is restrictive in application because it predicates on the assumption that the person concerned was once integrated into society and now needs reintegration. However, in many instances of PWDs, this may not be the case. Apparently, one word — rehabilitation — is used to cater to both types of PWDs: those who need integration and those who need reintegration into society. The use of the word rehabilitation for integration seems preposterous. This point also displays the explanatory deficiency embedded in the term rehabilitation of PWDs. The danger is that, for a novice member of PWDs to be integrated into society, measures may be employed that are meant for the reintegration of a veteran member of PWDs into society. In this way, the expectancy level — in the context of what PWDs may expect from society or what is expected of them — differs between those who need integration and those who need reintegration. To express integration, another word — habilitation — needs to be used. The challenge of integration into society rests more with the mental half than with the physical half of PWDs. The mental half of PWDs offers the challenge because neither do the sufferers have a conscious understanding of integration nor do they have any remembrance of integration. They cannot make a conscious effort to become integrated into society. Many, if not all members of this half, may not achieve full consciousness and thus remain short of becoming a full member of society. In this way, the actual challenge lies on the conscious level. However, from this half of PWDs, visually impaired persons are the sub-type that is more successfully integrated into society than the rest of the sub-types, though an earlier detection of some other sub-types immediately after birth, such as hearing impairment, may allow medical intervention through cochlear implantation to facilitate recovery to a near or full normal state leading to early integration into society. Unfortunately, most of the mentally impaired half of PWDs is not integrated into society and the sufferers remain dependent on society for their survival for the rest of their lives. This point also shows that segregation is not an option but a necessity devoted to this half of PWDs, though the ultimate objective of this segregation could be the integration (partly or fully) of this half of PWDs into society. The process of reintegration favours the physical half more than the mental half of PWDs, especially when a multiple disorder is absent. The physical half of PWDs, without an accompanying mental impairment, offers less resistance because the sufferers may at least have a conscious understanding of integration, even if not the remembrance of integration. Modern medical and technological facilities can help them reintegrate into society. Hence, a conscious effort for reintegration does make a difference. Nevertheless, the presence of a multiple disorder such as Down’s Syndrome or cerebral palsy may jeopardise the possibility narrative. To rationalise or to attenuate the stigma attached to the word disabilities, the word diversity is applied. That is, the mere existence of PWDs heralds the diversification of a humane society. In the motley of ethnic, racial, linguistic, religious and social diversities, just another tinge is added: PWDs. This is because diversification beckons the concept of an inclusive society. Whereas an inclusive education is a means to both integration (habilitation) and reintegration (rehabilitation) of PWDs into society, an inclusive society is an end to achieve. To the contrary, a non-inclusive society tends to segregate its PWDs, even when unnecessary. Societies that accommodate inequality are loath to the idea of diversity (based on the combination of those who are impaired and those who are not). However, societies that appreciate equality (such as democratic societies) consider consequent diversity to reinforce the concept of equality. Hence, the major challenge of introducing the concept of inclusive education or inclusive society comes from society’s obsession with respecting inequality and by consistently thriving on it. The more society is democratic, the earlier comes inclusion and vice versa. PWDs themselves may not aspire for a better life except those amongst them who discern its meaning. Otherwise, all PWDs have the right to a better life, whether they desire it or not. PWDs may not be able to create space for themselves in society but it is the duty of the state to offer them compulsory space (or an enabling environment) for honourable survival. This is where the need for the role of awareness of society at large comes in and this is where the need for the formulation of a policy and enactment of legislation arises. The writer is a freelance columnist and can be reached at qaisarrashid@yahoo.com