Inequality and Climate Change: Government Cannot Deliver Sustainability Without Disability Justice

As a disability specialist, activist and recovering academic, my interest in sustainability began with a simple but disturbing observation: disabled people had largely been excluded from conversations about the future of our planet. Representing more than 600 million people when the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were first agreed—and well over a billion today—we were almost invisible. Although disability was later incorporated into the Goals, I remain deeply concerned by the hierarchy and grouping the goals create. Disability is too often treated as an afterthought, disabled individuals a separate population, rather than recognised as equals in sustainable development.

I vividly remember a conversation with my PhD supervisor in which we realised that every single Sustainable Development Goal has disproportionate consequences for disabled people. Whether the issue is poverty, education, housing, employment, transport, health, gender equality or climate action, failure to achieve these goals falls hardest on those already living with structural disadvantage. Climate change does not only create inequality; it magnifies it. Governments cannot claim success on sustainability while leaving disabled people furthest behind.

When I began researching the relationship between ableism  and climate change in 2018, I found remarkably little literature - I remember 1 lone paper. The few papers that referenced the issue obliquely concluded that disabled people and their representative organisations [DPOs] were largely absent from strategic discussions. This exclusion has practical consequences. Recycling centres are often inaccessible. Waste collection policies frequently assume everyone can carry heavy bins to the kerbside. Sustainable transport initiatives regularly overlook those with mobility impairments. The result is that disabled people are expected to make a greater effort, incur higher costs and overcome additional barriers simply to participate in environmental action.

These are not isolated inconveniences. They expose a profound failure of public policy.

The government must not separate environmental policy from social justice. A green transition that ignores accessibility is not a just transition. Every climate strategy should be assessed against its impact on the disabled population before implementation, not as an afterthought once inequality has already been created.

Poverty lies at the heart of this injustice. Disabled people face substantial barriers to employment, education and career progression, resulting in lower incomes and greater financial insecurity. At the same time, disability often brings unavoidable additional costs. Accessible housing is more expensive. Transport options are limited. Energy bills are higher. Specialist equipment must be purchased and maintained. The cost of participating in society is already significantly greater before environmental policies impose further demands.

Without recognising these realities, governments cannot accurately measure the true social cost of climate change or the fairness of their responses. Sustainability cannot simply be about reducing carbon emissions; it must also reduce inequality.

The structure of the Sustainable Development Goals unintentionally reinforces this problem by positioning disabled people as a subgroup requiring occasional consideration, rather than recognising disability as a cross-cutting issue that shapes every goal. Yet those facing ableism is one of the largest global minorities and, arguably, the only group that anyone can join at any stage of life. Disability is not a niche concern. It is a mainstream human experience.

Disabled academics, campaigners and professionals have contributed sophisticated thinking on climate justice, resilience and sustainable communities for many years. Yet their expertise remains marginalised. This is part of a wider failure to trust disabled professionals as experts in our own lives. Too often governments consult about disabled people rather than with disabled people, and policies are weakened as a result.

My own experiences illustrate how everyday prejudice feeds this wider culture. I am frequently criticised for using plastic drinking straws because they enable me to drink safely. The irony is obvious. I use perhaps twenty reusable plastic straws each year, washing and reusing them repeatedly, while the average household throws away vastly more plastic packaging every week. The problem is not the straw. The problem is a society that is quicker to judge disabled people's survival than its own consumption.

The same assumptions appear within organisations. Throughout my career, I have experienced exclusion from meetings, discriminatory pricing at conferences and networks, and persistent suggestions that disabled employees represent a burden rather than an asset. These attitudes are justified using the language of cost and efficiency while ignoring the value, expertise and contribution disabled people make.

Perhaps nowhere was this clearer than during the COVID-19 pandemic. Disabled people experienced widespread failures in protection, support and recognition. The use of Do Not Resuscitate notices without proper consultation, the devastating death toll in institutional settings, delayed vaccine prioritisation and inadequate financial support for those shielding exposed how quickly disabled lives could become politically expendable. Those failures were not accidents. They reflected longstanding inequalities that the government had failed to address long before the pandemic arrived.

The government must recognise that disability equality is not a specialist issue to be delegated to equality teams. It is fundamental to effective environmental, economic and social policy. Every climate strategy, every infrastructure project and every sustainability programme should be judged by one simple question: does this reduce inequality, or does it deepen it?

Most people will experience disability themselves or love someone who does. As populations age, disability becomes an increasingly universal part of the human condition. Sustainable development that excludes disabled people is therefore neither sustainable nor equitable.

The former Disability Commissioner at the Equality and Human Rights Commission warned over a decade ago that disabled people risked living in what he described as a form of "social apartheid". Despite greater visibility, many were becoming increasingly isolated as economic and social systems changed around them. That warning remains painfully relevant today.

My own research explored the absence of language that enables organisations and governments to recognise these inequalities. When disability is omitted from strategic conversations, exclusion becomes normalised. Policies appear neutral while producing profoundly unequal outcomes. This cultural toxicity often goes unnoticed, allowing institutions to avoid accountability for the human rights of disabled people.

Climate policy cannot succeed if it leaves millions behind. Governments must stop treating disability as an afterthought and start recognising disabled people as essential partners in creating a sustainable future. Environmental justice and disability justice are inseparable. We will never achieve one without the other.

Everyday Hostility

Why everyday dismissals hurt as much as open hostility

I’m still trying to process what happened this week.

I was in my favourite shop when an older woman came up behind me, asked me to move, and before I could get out of the way, she pushed past — knocking me to the floor.

What happened next is harder to swallow. Instead of apologising, as I would have, she turned to my husband and said, “I asked her to move,” in the tone of someone scolding a toddler who’d run amok — not a sixty-year-old reaching for a pie from the freezer. As she carried on, I stood behind her, proud at least that I managed to say, “How rude!”

On one hand, we can’t legislate for nastiness. But I think there’s more going on here, so bear with me.

Contrary to common assumptions, I don’t think of myself as disabled until the world reminds me. (Thank you, Audrey — well remembered.) When I wake up, my priorities are simple: a pee, a coffee, a handful of pills. I don’t sit on the edge of the bed thinking, Hey world, I’m disabled. It doesn’t cross my mind, because I feel totally normal — or at least typical-for-Mole.

Then I turn on the radio, TV, or social feeds, and it’s only a matter of time before the world tells me otherwise. Many people don’t notice how hostile stories about disabled people have become. But minds take it in. I’ve slammed the off-switch rather than hear another tirade about “lazy scroungers” supposedly driving up the tax bill. Even our current Shadow Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has made it a public mission to brand disabled people as “work-shy.” Rights to personal care are questioned. Support bills are shuffled onto those least likely to be fully paid — if they’re employed at all. A double whammy.

And it’s not just about money. While the press obsesses over the “cost of care,” disabled people are offered instead the “right to die.” I can’t describe how painful it is to read that my own government considers my life expendable. And yes, I think about that more often than I’d like.

I’ve learned to live with passing rejection, disgust, and sometimes outright hate. People make it plain I’m not welcome in their space. People who make a huge performance of looking anywhere but at me. On the street, strangers have hurled insults, told me what to do, or spoken to whoever I’m with instead of to me.

And that’s just the obvious stuff. At work, colleagues have dismissed what I say as untrustworthy or assumed they get to grant me permission to have help, act or speak. The cumulative weight of these “small” moments is heavy: every “If I were you…”, every “I’ll tell you what you need…”, every “You can try harder…”adds up. The message is clear: I’m a problem to manage, not a person to respect.

Then there’s the blurry line between friendliness and intrusion. Strangers demand the intimacy of friendship where it hasn’t been earned, treat me like a child, invade my privacy, or ask questions they’d never dream of asking someone who looked more “typical.” Most bystanders are too stunned to name it for what it is: prejudice. But that’s exactly what it is.

The truth is, we’ve all grown up on stereotypes about disabled people. We’ve all seen teachers dismiss students, groups close their doors to the “less able,” differences mocked as entertainment. None of this is new. But in the UK lately, the gloves are off. The bile allowed on our screens has soared. There’s no shame in shaming.

So no, I shouldn’t be surprised when people push me out of the way. But it still hurts. Because each moment like that isn’t isolated. It’s part of a pattern — the not-so-close face of ableism.

The Power of Memoir:

 Personal Narratives as Catalysts for Social Change

Memoirs have long served as a powerful medium for sharing personal experiences and illuminating broader societal issues. By offering deeply personal accounts, these narratives provide readers with unique perspectives, allowing them to step into the author's world and gain insight into diverse lived experiences. In this blog, we explore several memoirs that tackle challenging topics and reveal important truths about our world.

Exploring Personal Narratives and Social Issues

1. Institutional Negligence and Abuse

Joe Gibson’s Seventeen*(2023) courageously addresses the sensitive issue of a teacher’s affair with a student. More than just a personal account, this memoir critically examines institutional responses to misconduct. Gibson exposes how some organisations prioritise reputation over justice, revealing the troubling reality of systemic failures in safeguarding vulnerable individuals. This book underscores the urgent need for accountability and systemic reform to prevent such abuses.

2. The Art of Writing Life Stories

Cathy Rentzenbrink’s Write It All Down: How to Put Your Life on the Page (2023) offers a compelling and accessible guide to memoir writing. With a conversational tone, Rentzenbrink demystifies the writing process and explores classism in literature, shedding light on representation and diversity in storytelling. Her work resonates with themes of equality, diversity, leadership, and ableism, demonstrating how personal narratives can drive meaningful conversations about social issues.

3. Empathy Through Storytelling

While Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s *Americanah* (2013) is a novel rather than a memoir, it employs deeply personal storytelling techniques that mirror the memoir genre. Adichie’s ability to immerse readers in her protagonist’s experiences fosters empathy and understanding across cultural divides. Her work demonstrates how relatable and engaging storytelling can serve as a bridge between different lived realities.

#### **4. Disability Rights and Shared Humanity**

Judith Heumann’s *Being Heumann: The Unrepentant Memoir of a Disability Rights Activist* (2021) is a powerful testament to the role of personal stories in advancing social change. As a leading disability rights activist, Heumann challenges ableist assumptions and invites readers into spaces where discrimination persists. Her memoir encourages deeper understanding and solidarity by highlighting the shared humanity of disabled individuals.

5. Race, Identity, and Mental Health

David Harewood’s Maybe I Don’t Belong Here: A Memoir of Race, Identity, Breakdown and Recovery (2022) offers a poignant exploration of racial discrimination, mental health, and identity. Harewood articulates the complexities of navigating environments that demand conformity while subjecting individuals to systemic biases. His memoir sheds light on the profound impact of societal prejudices on mental well-being and self-perception.

Ruth Winter's Survival: a Memoir, talks of how depression can be triggered, by lifestyle and circumstances, as equally as it can be a physical flaw. Nurture or nature?  An inherited a vulnerability, through repeated attacks strength may also have been weakened by hate. While nurture can enhance well-being, so too can environments erode it. A story that gives voice to those who often go unheard in our society. This work sheds light on the hidden experiences of disabled individuals, survivors of sexual abuse, and victims of domestic violence and hate crimes.

6. Cultural Identity and Belonging

Anita Rani’s The Right Sort of Girl (2021) provides a compelling narrative about identity and belonging. As a British-Indian broadcaster, Rani shares her experiences of growing up between two cultures, addressing racism, sexism, and the pressure to conform. Her storytelling is vivid and immersive, making readers feel as though they are walking alongside her. She tackles heavy themes with the warmth and familiarity of a trusted confidant, demonstrating how personal narratives can be both impactful and relatable.

7. Resilience and Humour in Personal Storytelling

Sara Cox’s Till the Cows Come Home: A Lancashire Childhood (2019) brings a refreshing blend of humour and heart to the memoir genre. Cox’s portrayal of her rural upbringing in Lancashire offers an authentic glimpse into working-class life in Britain. Through her witty and engaging storytelling, she addresses themes of family, class, and resilience, illustrating how memoirs can balance humour with profound insights into social and cultural experiences.

Conclusion

These memoirs highlight the power of personal narratives in addressing critical social issues. By sharing their truths, authors like Gibson, Rentzenbrink, Adichie, Heumann, Harewood, Rani, and Cox challenge readers to confront uncomfortable realities while fostering greater empathy and understanding. Their stories spark vital conversations about abuse, class, race, disability, mental health, cultural identity, and the broader human experience.

As both readers and writers, we can learn from these courageous storytellers who have laid bare their lives on the page. Their work reminds us that memoirs are more than just personal accounts—they are catalysts for social change. Whether through raw honesty, conversational storytelling, or humour, these narratives prove that there are many ways to share one’s truth and leave a lasting impact on readers.

What memoirs have had an impact on your perspective? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

The Invisible Ripple

Exploring Systemic Discrimination and Disability Hate Crime through Literature

 

A few years ago, I was tasked with updating out understanding of hate crime in a national report on disability hate crime—a responsibility that weighed heavily, not just in its content but in its broader implications. It was a monumental challenge to condense such an urgent, layered issue into a form that would engage readers without sacrificing its critical findings. The underlying driver of this crime, as I came to understand, is a societal narrative so ingrained it’s often invisible: ableism.  

 

The process of working on that report planted the seeds for something greater. Returning to my PhD allowed me to refine and reframe those academic ideas—inequality, disadvantage, prejudice—into something more accessible. The result is a growing series of books designed to shine a light on systemic discrimination and its deeply personal and institutional impacts. 

 

Pools and Prejudice: The Personal Toll of Ableism  

The first book, Pools and Prejudice, dives into the individual experience of prejudice, exposing its life-altering effects. Through powerful storytelling, it seeks to bridge the gap between abstract concepts and the visceral realities they create. It’s a narrative that challenges readers to confront the hidden privileges and biases shaping our lives.

 

COVER OF POOLS

Jamaica Hollow: When Organizations Fail  

The second book, Jamaica Hollow, turns its focus to the organizational level. It examines the failure of accountability and the legitimacy gap that can spiral into human rights violations. By unravelling these systemic breakdowns, the story reveals the dangerous consequences of ignoring structural discrimination.  

 

COVER OF JAMAICA HOLLOW

What’s Next: Plim Players

The third instalment, Plim Players, is in the works. This book will address cultural factors behind the silencing of certain groups, further peeling back the layers of systemic inequality and offering new ways to think about social justice.  

 

COVER OF PLIM PLAYERS

Why These Stories Matter  

If there’s one thing I’ve learned, it’s that issues like ableism and systemic discrimination thrive in silence and invisibility. My goal with these books is to break that silence. By weaving narratives that inform and provoke, I hope to empower readers to recognise what many choose to ignore—or learn about - and inspire change at both personal, organisational and societal levels.  

 

Leadership challenge 

Systemic discrimination, particularly when it leads to hate crime, is not just a “specialist” issue. It’s a human rights issue that speaks to who we are as a society. Pools and Prejudice, Jamaica Hollow, and the upcoming Plim Players will contribute to a growing understanding and, ultimately, a more mindful way of working for many. 

 

Let these stories open the door to conversations that are long overdue. If you’re ready to look past the surface and into the systems that shape our lives, these books are your next read.   

C-Change- Realigning the stars

At C-Change, our colleagues are committed to embracing diversity, challenging conventional practices, offering choices, inspiring hope, and fostering inclusive environments. We are on a collective journey to explore the history of C-Change, adopt an allied stance, understand the principles of inclusive practice, and discuss ways to promote equality and diversity. This is not my story; it is an organisational account framed through an equality lens.

Exploring the 5 Ps: Integrating Key Principles into Organisational Life

[Description: C-Change constellation: five stars labelled People, Public, Privilege, and Political]

People make C-Change

It’s Personal: If You're Affected, You're Involved

It was a delight to begin by listening to a colleague who shared how things started for the organisation. With the closure of Lennox Hospital, several ‘patients’ with complex requirements were left in need of homes within communities. From the start, C-Change was innovative in finding ways to support the well-being of those previously locked in institutions. With the support of colleagues and the direction of families, people were not only supported better but also more cost-effectively, as intervention costs often dropped over time. I pointed out how the ‘cheaper’ aspect has become important again, sadly, under austerity. Fundamentally, at C-Change, human rights come first, not ‘care’ or ‘aid’ because it's all about prioritising well-being and rights. The conversation continued with longer-serving colleagues explaining to newer members the importance of enabling people to enjoy family homes within their localities. 

I'm always struck that the roots of the organisation mirror the emergence of the Disabled People's Movement and its fight for deinstitutionalisation. I was working for a DPO at the time but was too young and inexperienced to grasp the significance of the Movement. Only later did I connect the dots, and realise the meaning, the coalescence of smaller groups of d/Disabled individuals seeking to leave hospitals so their well-being needs were addressed as well as their medical needs. Hence, the Medical Model/Social Model distinction, while criticised today, made much more sense in this historical context and the nature of the fight.

I always enjoy C-Change's culture of ‘Radical Hospitality’ because it is about empathy and interaction, not just an initial greeting. It’s about fostering a sense of belonging and anticipating changes, understanding that while needs may be universal, individual wishes and preferences matter immensely. I don't need to declare, identify or fill in a form to ask for help. Plus, because I know the answer will be ‘yes,’ I'm never afraid to ask. It’s the intentionality behind my colleagues' interactions that fosters well-being, far more than rigid lists of do’s and don’ts, which can often be limiting.

Question: Well-being?

1. What is important for me?

2. What is important to me?

 Allied Position and Unearned Privilege

While many individuals will experience things differently, it is crucial for us, as colleagues, to acknowledge and address the disadvantages many face without reinforcing the common stereotypes imposed on them. C-Change has a long-standing tradition of viewing each person as unique; they are team leaders, responsible for the decisions made about their support (or helped to do so). Our colleagues amplify diverse voices, ensuring that each individual's needs, wants, dreams and unique identities are fully acknowledged and respected.

The feedback to the questions I raised, was intended to raise the matter of practice based on medical ‘musts’ rather than human needs, wants, and wishes. I shared with colleagues that I've often forgone things that may appear essential to others (e.g., parking) in favour of things that bring me huge joy (e.g. fires). Very quickly, colleagues understood how personal choice is, and that with limited time, energy, and money, the freedom to choose was important in order not to simply focus on need but the wider range of things we each require for our well-being. If we reduce access to essential needs, most will struggle or suffer. Furthermore, if we only apply well-being to health matters it's too late.

Public Matter - Professionals Natter

We then began a conversation about Personalisation, Standards, and Citizenship. I offered that during my time at C-Change, I'd observed that the organisation had a counter-narrative. One that moved in the opposite direction to many service providers within the care sector. I felt that working in different ways, with alternative wording, and an aim to uphold human rights, produced a culture that was often (positively) at odds with institutional and public assumptions.

A huge amount of great practice was shared, with colleagues keen to explore how and why things go wrong at times.

Jo’s Narrative: Not a Service User but a Person We Work For

Jo is not a client but a brother, neighbour, student, voter, train enthusiast, and teammate. The narrative of Jo’s life challenges conventional labels, highlighting his full humanity.

A Privilege: Adopting an Allied Position

Mea culpa, I did shoehorn my willingness to share ideas of critical theory behind the word ‘privilege.’ For colleagues, privilege is a delighted pride they have in their roles, a tangible feeling of honoring the lives of those they support. The energy in the room rose as everyone shared their stories. “My colleague said they got more from the person they support than the person got from them!” was shared with huge joy - I teared up. Imagine if such feelings were shared across the entire social care sector. A stark contradiction, I felt, to the daily barrage of negative press many are subjected to. The flaying by paper-cut of thoughtless comments, reiterated niceties no doubt well-intentioned, but oppressive, dehumanising, and disempowering over time. Yet you can't say, “I've lost it,” because people judge, as they can't see you've been kicked repeatedly in the same spot over years.

From a critical perspective, privilege means being able to live without the disadvantage of a specific and characteristic discrimination. For example, my privilege is living free of classism, homophobia, and racism… no one other than me knows exactly how far or narrow the extent of my overall unearned dis/advantage spreads. What I can say is that from this intersectional position, facing ableism is a disadvantage (not my lack of ability). If my advantage is not facing racism, then the privilege of many is not facing ableism. In domestic violence organisations, the political alignment is to feminism. Therefore, I’m gappy to say that reference to disability equality is instinctive C-Change because of the population within the org. My colleagues are anti-ableists almost intuitively, but I’d guess it is because there has been much work/learning in the past and along the way.

“Non-disabled privilege is unearned advantage, the absence of the prejudice, discrimination, and injustice weighing on the disabled population. A position often left unarticulated and unchallenged.”

We talked a great deal about how privilege relates to politics, policy, and practice. Many voiced their intent to learn more.

Human Rights and Panel Principles: Participation, Accountability, Non-discrimination, Empowerment, Legality.

Political: Control - Fundamental to Well-being

Choice and control are not just important; they are essential to well-being because of their profound impact on health. At C-Change, discussions about finances are clearly defined by people's ownership of their money, empowering individuals to make decisions based on personal desires rather than imposed ideas about needs. This way, C-Change can offer choice and control, not just a few options, fostering resilience. Furthermore, the ongoing relationship with people ensures that preferences are understood and expected to change. Personal networks—family, friends, and neighbours—also play a significant role in daily choices, ensuring present happiness and long-term well-being.

Principles of Inclusive Practice - Choice: Ensuring respect in service provision without imposing restrictive norms of working practice.

Positive: Cultivating Hope

I felt it was ironic that we got to the exuberant and high-energy part just as I was physically fit to drop. As I set the groups up to work, I reflected on how much easier it was to work with three impairments, not five! And that when people observe you doing a job well, they’re largely unaware of the effort required. It used to be far easier to spend most energy on the job than now having to spend it on personal movement - both physical and mental. I often watch my colleagues work effortlessly with others, taking a minute to appreciate how much intentionality goes into making this possible!

Anticipation allows us to envision a hopeful future, creating a proactive rather than reactive environment. At C-Change, discussions about the future are filled with optimism, encouraging actions that turn aspirations into reality.

Questions:

1. What are six things that I value and take for granted in my life?

2. Can the people we work for do the same?

The conversation moved into party politics, unsurprisingly given recent events in the UK.

Web of Accountabilities

Closing the gap [legitimacy] between professional accounts and the voice of the people we work for demands that we add more to strategic conversations than financial consideration. At C-Change, when teams talk about the rights, they intentionally realign the conversation to the 5 Ps. This means that well-being is considered and human rights are honoured. As the (bad) graph below shows, when more time is given to what is possible, political, and a privilege rights are denied less often - colleagues don't stop at the individual (people).

Turning to the keywords in our discussions—hospitality, citizenship, choice, control, anticipation—these elements interconnect like a web, creating a space that could help sense, if not measure, accountability. At C-Change, I plotted a culture of proximity and trust, essential for recognising and responding to others' needs and feelings. Rather than stop at people, the organisational conversations I’ve been part of extend far further to encompass their strategic objectives.

Final Thoughts

engaging with C-Change's narrative provides many insights, but certainly articulates and reinforces the transformative power of accountability in whose voice and storytelling underpin change.

Note: I have purposefully omitted the more personal stuff we shared because, while illustrative, there is a difference between sharing personal experience and organisational know-how in public.

Account-ability: human rights in disability conversation

In the professional realm, the articulation of accountability within the framework of Equality & Diversity is pivotal. This approach also provides a lens through which to examine and address disablism and ableism in everyday practices. 

This post touches on:

- The Voices of Disabled People and THEIR Civil Rights Movement

Recognition of disabled individuals as the primary authors of their narrative, but foremost for business the role of D/deaf and Disabled People’s Organisations in articulating a collective story of shared interests
- Trust as a Foundation for Inclusive Practice 
 Accountability is viewed as a journey where positive exchanges contribute to a bank of trust, which serves as a buffer against lapses in practice, fostering a workplace environment guided by respect.
- Beyond Financial Considerations:
Accountability can be measured as the amount of time given in conversation to the interests of the disabled population [as defined by the Sustainable Development Goals].
- Account-Ability and the Social Model
The Social Model is used as a way of offering an alternative to the legitimacy gap as defined in the previous post.

This post addresses the Sustainable Development Goals, particularly 11, 12, 13, 16 and 17, which deal with inequality, sustainable institutions, governance, and peace & justice.

Expressing Interests Equitably:

Disabled individuals are the primary authors of their narratives. The story they tell is a manifestation of their interests and experiences. Recognising and valuing their self-expression, professional knowledge, and group voice is fundamental in fostering an inclusive environment.

 

The Role of Civil Rights Organisations:

 

In the tapestry of disabled people's voices, civil rights movements play a crucial role. D/deaf and Disabled People’s Organisations serve as storytellers, articulating a narrative of shared interests. Their legitimacy is derived from being accountable to the disabled population, providing a genuine reflection of the challenges and interests within and across communities of disabled people.

 

Trust as a Currency

 

Accountability can be viewed as a journey where positive exchanges contribute to a bank of trust. When leaders appreciate the contributions of disabled individuals, acknowledging and adding to the metaphorical pot, the trust they demonstrate can help build a culture of mutual respect. Trust becomes a buffer, positive feeling in cases of inadvertent lapses in appropriate language, for example, fostering a workplace where communication is guided by respect.

 

Response Ability and the Social Model:

 

The Social Model, a cornerstone of critical disability theory, offers an alternative perspective to the prevalent Medical Model [see Figure 2]. It represents a recognizable voice guiding organizational conversations away from individualized or medicalized problem-solving. Instead, it promotes shared responsibility, recognizing Disabled people as a civil rights group with a legitimate voice for human rights accountability. The daily disadvantages faced by Disabled individuals are not solely physical; the model also highlights the societal fear and lack of understanding perpetuating discrimination.  In essence, accountability transcends mere policies; it is a collective journey undertaken by all workers. Shifting organisational storytelling to be able to count disabled people 'in' requires a holistic and inclusive approach. Each member of the workforce plays a crucial role in creating an environment free from discrimination, and fostering a workplace culture guided by respect, trust, and shared responsibility. By embracing these principles, organisations can truly become equitable by laying the groundwork for workplaces that are not only inclusive but also empowering for all.

 

Beyond Financial Considerations:

 

Accountability to the disabled population, 10% of any group, must not be compartmentalised into single policies or departments. The notion that 'disability' can be confined to a stand-alone file contradicts the idea that every worker may identify, and can willingly and effectively respond to prevent discrimination or speak out against injustice. Accountability can be measured as the amount of time devoted to talking about the disabled population's interests - not any one individual's preferences. In my work, I plotted these along five axes representing a human rights discourse: political, public, innovative, financial; and civic.

 

Shared Responsibility for Inclusive Environments:

 

The Social Model, like the Medical Model, is a shorthand for critical disability theory - as put forward by Disabled people.  A recognisable voice which represents an alternative perspective. The concept of response-ability, can be strengthened by the Social Model [Disability Studies], and urges organisations to embrace a shared responsibility. Through its lens Disabled people are not viewed merely as individuals with specific needs, but as a civil rights group advocating for human rights. The Social Model shines a light on the societal factors contributing to discrimination, emphasising the need to address fear, lack of understanding, and inequality alongside physical barriers.

The task of altering environments to eliminate disadvantages for disabled workers should not be the responsibility of a select few. Instead, it necessitates a collective effort from all workers. Shifting organizational storytelling to be accountable to disabled people requires a comprehensive and inclusive approach, where each member of the workforce actively contributes to creating an environment free from discrimination.

Conclusion 

In this exploration of accountability, it is evident that the power of disabled people's voices and civil rights movements is paramount. Recognising disabled individuals as the authors of their narrative and acknowledging the role of D/deaf and Disabled People’s Organisations in articulating shared experiences creates a foundation of authenticity and understanding.

 

Empowering Inclusion: The Power of Respectful Language in Conversation

Introduction:

In the realm of disability discourse, the choice of words becomes a potent tool to articulate barriers, disadvantages, and discrimination. This blog delves into the nuances of language policy, advocating for a mindful consideration of the words we choose and the profound impact they carry. By challenging negative narratives and stereotypes, we can cultivate a culture of inclusivity and understanding within organizations.

Respectful Language

Current terminology surrounding disability often carries negative and medical connotations, perpetuating myths prevalent in everyday conversations. Words like 'disability' attempt to encapsulate 'personal difference,' 'labelled group,' and 'inequality.' However, the focus should shift towards promoting respectful language that prompts individuals to contemplate the meaning and context of their choices, especially in public documents where terminology plays a crucial role in defining organisational culture.

The Workplace as a Potential Source of Barriers:

The workplace, often unintentionally, presents barriers through organisational and institutional practices that may contribute to disabling people. It is crucial for professionals to feel empowered to participate fully, irrespective of whether they have impairments themselves.

Words to Use with Care in the UK:

1. Ableism: A societal oppression embedded in workplace language, comparable to other forms of systemic discrimination such as homophobia, racism, sexism, classism, ageism, or religious intolerance.

 2.D/deaf and Disabled People’s Organisations: Organisations and groups run by Disabled people, including those who identify as Deaf and/or have their own language, such as British Sign Language in the UK.

3. Institutional Discrimination: Organisational oppression directly affecting disabled people, unchallenged within the workplace and across institutional boundaries.

4. Disabled People: The capital 'D' is used by those aligning with the Disabled People’s Movement, reflecting a political choice rooted in Disability Studies. In the UK, 'disabled people / dp' is preferred over 'people with disabilities.'

5. The Disabled Population: Acknowledging the large number of individuals experiencing ableism, 'population' denotes a statistical group. Not all disabled people identify with being Disabled, or join the Disabled People’s Movement, and some may not even like the term 'disabled.'

6.The D/deaf and Disabled People’s Civil Rights Movement: A network of disabled individuals, some supported by allies, viewed as a civil rights group, comparable to feminist or anti-racist movements.

Myths and Assumptions:

1. Scale: Challenge the myth that disabled people are a small, separate group by describing them as the 'world majority'—1 to 2 in 10 people could identify as disabled.

2. Fitting In: Avoid polarising disabled people as a separate subgroup. Instead, recognise them as part of a population facing common disadvantages.

3. Societal Impact and External Cost: Present any cost of employing disabled individuals as a good investment to secure a more inclusive culture and a larger talent pool.

4. Illness and Institutional Practice: Differentiate between illness and disability to prevent viewing the disabled as having a problem to be cured.

5. Personal/Private Boundaries: give disability and illness separate definitions in workplace conversations /policy/guidelines in order to address the barriers, discrimination, and inequality the disabled population face with intent.

The Legitimacy Gap – The Medical Model:

An ethical articulation of accountability is one that qualifies equality and diversity, and helps all workers speak with confidence when addressing ableism in everyday practice.

A legitimacy gap arises when organisational storytelling fails to demonstrate accountability, and diverges significantly from a narrative that hours the interests of the disabled population. 

Acknowledging the character of this gap, for example, the significance of the Medical Model, allows business leaders to respond effectively in both personal and public conversations by addressing specific barriers, discrimination and injustice disabled people face in conversation.

In Conclusion:

Understanding and embracing respectful language while dispelling myths in conversation about disability can help organisations create an inclusive and empowering environment for all. By fostering a culture of awareness and sensitivity, business leaders can contribute to breaking down barriers and promoting equality within our workplaces and beyond.

The Disability Employment Gap – A Closer Look

This blog sheds light on the gap in work opportunity for the disabled population. By exploring how:

- Workplaces often fall short in recruiting and promoting disabled workers, and

- They unwittingly contribute to the injustice imposed on the disabled population. 

EMPLOYMENT 

The low employment rate of disabled people is a human rights issue, which leads to a higher likelihood that disabled individuals struggle to secure employment and face extended periods of unemployment. The scope of the disabled population is larger than commonly thought. For instance, in a company of 1,000 employees, roughly one in ten, or 100 workers, may have impairments, whether they identify as disabled or not. This figure is significantly greater than the number of individuals parked in the few accessible bays outside the building. However, many people underestimate the size and diversity of the disabled population as a whole. Consequently, they tend to underestimate the extent of the problem and the cost of the disability employment gap to both the industry and society.

Clearly, the issue goes beyond the occasional lack of personal fit. Effective inclusive practices remain inconsistent, partly due to the diversity of impairments. While most differences have likely found accommodations in some form, overall inclusive practices are not yet a reality that disabled professionals can take for granted. Organisations and institutions often serve as sources of injustice, as disabled workers possess no less experience, skill, or wisdom than their non-disabled colleagues. However, they encounter far more barriers than most employers imagine. Many depend on organisations willing to take action to address the disadvantages they face. For business leaders, the challenge is to align organisational change to benefit both disabled individuals and the broader working community.

Culture Shock

• The unemployment rate is 1 in 4, which drops substantially for people with learning disabilities, compared to 1 in 10 for others.

• Fewer than 1 in 10 disabled individuals are currently employed, in contrast to 1 in 10 non-disabled people. This disparity has repercussions extending beyond finances, affecting well-being, self-esteem, relationships, and health.

• An astonishing 86% of all disabled people in the UK acquire their disability during the course of their working lives.

• The employment rate for disabled people stands at 45.4%, while non-disabled individuals have an employment rate of 81.2%, resulting in a substantial gap of 35.8 percentage points.

Why Being Seen at Work Matters

Efforts have frequently focused on accommodating impairments, with training solutions targeting frontline staff, while senior leadership teams have received less attention. Understandably, this has led to resistance from workers who felt overwhelmed by the amount they needed to learn. Moreover, without support from decision-makers, there has been minimal funding for strategy implementation. Additionally, it seems that disability training, when provided, often receives less time and attendance compared to other equality strands. This poses a challenge, as professionals realize the depth and breadth of knowledge required to address these issues. Many now recognize that without the backing of senior management, leadership teams, and boards, strategies often fail to align and achieve the necessary changes. Time-consuming and costly individual-level adjustments rarely result in significant departmental transformations within a company's purpose. Therefore, viewed in this way, few organizations do nothing, most take some action, and many could do more.

The net result is that few do nothing, most do something, and far more could make better use of what can and is being done together.

The importance of being visible at work lies in creating clear boundaries between private and public discourse, dispelling myths and uncertainties about disability, and fostering inclusivity. In the workplace, error is rarely as problematic as silence. People are generally flexible and understanding when they make an effort to use mindful language. However, in public documents and within organisations, terminology becomes far more critical, as it shapes the culture and values of an organization. Therefore, being seen at work and fostering open discussions about disability is pivotal in bridging the gap and promoting a culture of inclusivity.

Ableism - Lifting The Veil

Ableism: 

I will be posting a series of posts dealing with tackling ableism at work. The handbook capturing the series can be found here.

A Silhouette of Silence 

 

This piece outlines the challenges and limitations of addressing the aspects of culture and language that disadvantage disabled people. The first three sections specifically address ontological and epistemological issues that must be addressed before methodology or literature can be discussed.

 

I argue that experimental science is not an appropriate methodology for this type of research, as it is inherently oppressive to disabled people. Instead, I want to say that a caring methodology,  a feminist approach, for example, respects disabled people's experiences and perspectives. Research also needs to be emancipatory, meaning that it should seek to empower participants and challenge the systems that disadvantage them. Research, therefore, needs to be grounded in a social constructionist perspective of co-production, which means that it should be conducted in collaboration.

I  conclude by discussing the importance of language and culture in shaping the experiences and argue that ableism is often reinforced through language and culture unwittingly, therefore important to be mindful of this when conducting research.

Here are some key points:

·      Ableism is a form of oppression that disadvantages disabled people.

·      Traditional positivist experimental science is not an appropriate methodology for researching disability, as it is inherently oppressive.

·      Interpretivist-inductive methodology is a more respectful and emancipatory approach to researching disability.

·      Research on disability should be grounded in a social constructionist perspective of co-production, meaning that it should be conducted in collaboration with disabled people.

·      Language and culture play an important role in shaping the experiences of disabled people.

 

This blog critically examines the concept of ableism and its profound impact on d/Disabled individuals. I want to explore the social and systemic barriers faced by disabled individuals, emphasizing the urgent need for organisations and society to acknowledge and address these challenges. Accountability may be addressed by promoting the Sustainable Development Goals, particularly 11, 12, 13, 16 and 17, which deal with inequality,  institutions, governance, and peace & justice.

This piece encourages readers to reflect on their own biases, become advocates for disability rights, and actively contribute to positive change.

 

I. Introduction:

The issue of ableism has long been a subject of concern in contemporary society, I aim to provide a summary and analysis into the intricacies of this pervasive form of discrimination. By examining insights, we aim to shed light on the social and systemic barriers faced by disabled individuals.

 

II. Understanding Ableism:

Ableism refers to the prejudice and discrimination experienced by disabled individuals, stemming from societal attitudes and infrastructural barriers. This post emphasises an urgent need for society to recognise and address these challenges, as they significantly impact the human rights of disabled individuals.

 

III. Unveiling Social and Systemic Barriers:

I want to emphasise the importance of recognising and dismantling social and systemic barriers that perpetuate ableism. These barriers include inaccessible physical environments, limited educational opportunities, employment discrimination, and social stigmatization. Such barriers limit the full participation and inclusion of disabled individuals in various aspects of society.

 

IV. Promoting Equality and Opportunities:

In order to combat ableism, more needs to be done at strategic levels to address equality and opportunities for all individuals, regardless of their abilities. It highlights the significance of fostering understanding and empathy towards disabled people, I encourage readers to reflect on their own biases and assumptions.

 

V. Advocacy for Disability Rights:

The post serves as a call to action, urging readers to become advocates for disability rights. By raising awareness about the challenges faced by disabled individuals and engaging in open and respectful conversations, we can challenge ableism at both an individual and societal level.

 

VI. Conclusion:

In conclusion, the blogs that follow will provide a thought-provoking framework to explore the issue of ableism and its impact on disabled people. The crucial role of equality, understanding, and equal opportunities in fostering a more equitable society. By actively challenging ableism and advocating for disability rights, we can collectively work towards building a more inclusive and accepting world.