table of contents - home page - text-only home page International Disability Law & Policy Symposium Held in USA By Deborah Kaplan (dkaplan@wid.org) An International Disability Law and Policy Symposium, "From Principles to Practice", was held in Washington, D.C. from October 22 to 25, 2000. Sponsored by the U.S. Social Security Administration, and several other U.S. government agencies and presented by the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, Inc. (DREDF), the conference was attended by disability legal rights advocates and attorneys from over 30 countries. The agenda included plenary presentations, with several by authors of papers that were commissioned for the conference. Participants also had plenty of time in small workshops to become better acquainted with each other and share information and strategies for action. Participants came from every continent, from countries such as India, Greece, Kenya, Mexico, Spain, Uganda, Canada, Argentina, Macedonia, Japan, and, of course, the USA. A full participants list can be found at http://www.dredf.org/symposium/participants.html, DREDF's web site. Attendees held a wide variety of positions, from Members of Parliament, Presidents of organizations, academic Professors, Directors of government agencies, practicing attorneys, as well as students and activists. The conference provided simultaneous translation in English, Japanese, Spanish, Portuguese and French. However, language did not prove to be an insurmountable barrier, perhaps because disability lawyers and practitioners already share a common perspective. In this article, only a few major concepts from the conference will be described. DREDF's web page includes the full conference agenda, main papers that were presented and a global index of disability civil rights laws, http://www.dredf.org/symposium/index.html. Persistence of Prejudice David Ruebain, Head Of Education & Disability Law for Levenes Solicitors in London, presented a paper, "What is Prejudice as it Relates to Disability Anti-discrimination Law?". He spoke about prejudice, often from a personal as well a social perspective, and he examined the extent to which laws can overcome discrimination. He began by considering the nature of discrimination and the extent to which laws can deal with its subtleties. He stated that discrimination against disabled people permeates throughout society, a premise that found no argument at this conference, and added that what is particularly invidious is that these prejudices are then internalized by disabled people. Institutional Discrimination His major conclusion was that even fully comprehensive and enforceable civil rights legislation will not, by itself, solve the problem of discrimination against disabled people. This is because, like racism, sexism, heterosexism and other forms of institutional prejudices, discrimination against disabled people is institutionalized in the very fabric of society. Civil rights cannot be achieved by legislation alone but, rather, requires decisive political action, which itself is dependent on the adequate funding of a nationwide network of organizations controlled and run by disabled people themselves. It is these organizations that put the issue of institutional discrimination onto the political agenda, and these organizations which are best suited to ensure its eventual eradication. In particular, this can be accomplished through the promotion of "disability standards and action plans" designed to play a role in the process of value formation by which attitudes and ideas about disability becomes secondary to ideas and values about people, independent of their ability. Benefits of a More Tolerant Society A major intriguing theme to emerge from the presentations and discussions at this conference was touched on by Ruebain's remarks. Disability civil rights promotion efforts can be regarded as an important vanguard towards the creation of a world culture that values all human rights. Ruebain offered an anecdote from a session of a class that he taught, when he asked the non-disabled students to identify the benefits of integration of people with disabilities. One response was that the non-disabled students felt safer to be themselves, with all their flaws, in a society that would accept people with disabilities. This kind of radical social change requires more than enforcement of laws; it involves transformation of deep social values. Inherent Tension between Rights-based & Welfare Laws Another recurring theme of the conference was related to the tension between civil rights laws and social welfare laws. As noted by Lisa Waddington, Senior Lecturer in Law at Maastricht University in the Netherlands and Matthew Diller, Professor of Law at Fordham University School of Law, newer policy laws that are inspired by the civil rights model have been added to existing and older legal schemes, such as the long-established social security systems, segregated education and housing programs, and employment quotas, which were originally inspired by the social welfare model. Older social welfare laws were based on inherently discriminatory models of disability policy that assumed that people with disabilities could only be taken care of by others. Challenging the Parallel Universe According to Waddington and Diller, "Under the social welfare model, disability is seen as a defect in an individual that makes him or her unable to work or function in society in a conventional way. Under this approach, social institutions, such as employment and public services are designed to meet the needs of the non-disabled. Rather than adapting these institutions to accommodate disabilities, people with disabilities are directed toward a separate parallel track that provides income and services apart from the institutions that serve the non-disabled majority." International Survey of Legislation A survey of existing legislation related to legal rights of disabled people, was conducted by Theresia Degener, Professor of Law, Administration and Organisation, at the University of Applied Sciences Rheinland-Westfalen-Lippe, in Bochum, Germany and Gerard Quinn, Lecturer in Law at the National University of Ireland . Their results revealed that 42 countries have disability human rights laws, although they vary widely in scope and in enforceability. One of their conclusions is that most countries are beginning to view disability as a human or civil rights issue, and that we can expect more countries to enact similar laws. Partly this change is due to the UN Standard Rules on human rights and disability, which has served to legitimate this shift, and also can be attributed to the enactment of the ADA in the U.S. According to the authors, "If there is a broader message in the disability rights movement it is that citizenship means equal effective access to all dimensions of the lifeworld." Definitions within a Cultural Context However, the desire for human rights in many countries is often accompanied by an urgent need for social supports. Conference attendees from the United States and Europe were sometimes as odds with delegates from Third World countries over questions such as how to define disability. A very broad definition, which includes disabilities that do not result in significant functional impairment, is appropriate for legislative schemes that aim to prevent discrimination. However, a very broad definition of disability could cause problems for a social support program because it could result in overextended program budgets or might be seen to benefit people who really don't require disability related support. Social Policy Aimed at Maximising Freedom This question was addressed well by Degener and Quinn at the conclusion of their paper: "The discrimination agenda - important though it is - does not exhaust the full spectrum of issues that affect the full enjoyment of human rights by persons with disabilities. It is an indispensable tool. But it has to be frankly admitted that although effective legislation can open doors, it cannot facilitate the entry of people through those doors if other needs are not met. In other words, a concern for formal freedom needs to be matched with a concern for the means by which that freedom is exercised. The importance of achieving economic, social and cultural rights for people with disabilities should not be forgotten. By this we do not mean a social policy agenda that effectively traps people in a gilded cage of passive maintenance as in the past. No, we mean a social policy that aims to put positive supports in place to truly enable people to maximise their formal freedoms." table of contents - home page - text-only home page