The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with disabilities opens up opportunities to drive forward inclusive policy for people with disability. It also may serve as a benchmark for the evaluation of policy aimed at improving the lives of people with disabilities. For this to occur, it is vital to fix priorities for evaluation using participatory research methods that place disabled people and especially those who are “hard to reach” at the heart of the participatory process. Within this process, it will be vital to stress the commonality of disability since the goals of different organizations representing disabled people may be in tension. It is also crucial when evaluating policy to be clear of ones definitions and aims. There are also fundamental tensions within the concept of social inclusion. In particular, it is vital to take into account the potential tension between a social justice agenda founded on redistribution or recognition. This may be particularly well-illustrated through the case of cochlear implants and infantile screening for deafness. Nevertheless, it is also equally crucial to preserve a space for both dimensions within the policy agenda. This may partly be achieved through participatory parity where all participants within the deliberative process have the possibility of equal status and voice. Ultimately, both tensions associated with the participatory process and the principles underlying inclusion will be resolved through making choices that are necessary for action. It is preferable such choices are made by disabled people themselves. Such choices may be informed through participatory action research in which disabled people are involved.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sherlaw et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: