Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
• Over 60% of individuals with disabilities preferred separate public spaces. • They described the risks of harassment, discrimination, and social judgment • The study calls for inclusive design that reflects vulnerable populations’ needs. Vulnerable populations face increased risks of social violence and discrimination in public spaces, especially in the Global South. Despite growing interest in inclusive design to address these issues, understanding of their experiences and expectations remains inadequate. This study aimed to identify the specific needs for public spaces among people with disabilities in Bangkok, Thailand. A total of 407 individuals with disabilities were contacted and classified into eight disability categories. Of these, 384 participants completed a quantitative survey, and a subset of 23 individuals participated in in-depth interviews to explore their experiences and needs in greater detail. A key finding from the interviews was that many vulnerable individuals expressed a preference for public areas separated from the general public. This preference was voiced by over 60 percent across all gender groups. Beyond physical accessibility challenges, safety concerns related to socially negative behaviors shaped their preferences. Risks of sexual assault (mainly by non-disabled men against women with disabilities), discrimination, and social judgment were identified as threats to public safety. Those willing to share spaces with the general public often expressed hesitance to reveal their impairments publicly, fearing social attention, danger, and stigma. The study argues that providing physical access alone is insufficient; addressing social barriers is essential to creating secure, inclusive environments. The findings underscore the need to prioritize vulnerable populations’ needs in inclusive design, social spaces, and public policy.
Chuangchai et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: