By Megan Abbot
It is difficult
to estimate the number of people worldwide who are detained in institutions
against their will. People with
disabilities are especially vulnerable to being locked up under the guise of
protection and rehabilitation. Such segregation violates international law and
should outrage human rights supporters everywhere.
The United Nations Convention on the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities
(CRDP) codifies the rights of people with disabilities and is part of a broad paradigm
shift. Historically, disability has been
treated as a normative failing, a medical illness that should be corrected to
help a person live a normal
life. Today the social model of
disability seeks to build understanding of the many cultural, physical, or
systemic obstacles that prevent people from participating equally in society on
the basis of disability. Disability,
then, is a construction. The onus of
adaptation is not on the individual to overcome their disability. The onus is on society to build a more
inclusive environment for all.
A full 15%
of the world has a
disability. Communities worldwide
accommodate or perpetuate obstacles to disabilities differently. The structural barriers to full participation
based on physical, sensory, cognitive, developmental, or psychosocial
disabilities are all unique and intersect with other systems of both
empowerment and oppression. And the challenges
to equal participation are outsized in developing countries.
Let’s take
Mexico as an example. Mexico was a leader in adopting the CRPD,
and yet the government has done little to
implement the convention
or develop community-based programs for people detained in institutions. I have seen this firsthand. I worked for Disability
Rights International
(DRI) in Mexico City this past summer, where we conducted fact-finding on human
rights abuses against people with disabilities in institutions.
Institutions
segregate people from society, deny them fundamental freedoms, and can subject them
to egregious violence and abuse. Beatings, sexual assault, human trafficking,
long-term physical restraints, rampant over-medication, and utter neglect are
disturbingly common. In Mexico, DRI
documented a policy of forced sterilization of women with psychosocial disabilities. I, myself, saw a man who had lived in a cage
for most of the last 50 years. (Learn more.) Despite the data
showing that institutions are not safe, UNICEF estimates that there are nearly 30,000 children
living in institutions in Mexico alone.
International
law and disability theory pin the responsibility for preventing these abuses on
society at large. One fundamental tenant
of the CRPD is the right to live in the community with choices equal to others. This means the abolition of institutions and
the creation of community-based services and support.
Building
sustainable community-based services will not be easy for Mexico, if the United
States’ history is any indicator.
Disability rights advocates fear that the call to deinstitutionalization
will allow governments to shutter institutions without providing the
comprehensive services that these populations need to adjust to life in the community. (Think: housing, education, employment,
holistic medical and rehabilitative services, social workers, psychological and
legal support, etc.)
The United
States’ own deinstitutionalization process had some tragic unintended
results. We closed most of our
institutions over the last half-century, but did little to develop community-based
supports for people with psychosocial disabilities. The result? Mass homelessness and the
attendant criminalization of being mentally ill on the streets. Today the largest concentrations of people with
psychosocial disabilities in the U.S. are in America’s jails.
Much needs to be
done to assure the full participation and human rights of people with
disabilities in Mexico and worldwide. An
effective de-institutionalization process will require that holistic support structures
be in place before institutions’ doors are closed. Disability rights advocates are right to push
for governmental accountability on abuses occurring in institutions, and also to
keep advocating for community-based services.
0 comments:
Post a Comment