Disability Issues In Canada

Many countries across the world, consider Canada as one of the best in terms of the policies and programs it provides for its citizens. Over the past thirty years, Canada’s federal government has made a significant movement forward by recognizing disability issues as a priority. Yet despite all these efforts, disability policy scholars argue that there is still a lot of work to be done to ensure full inclusion of people with disabilities in Canada (McColl et al. 2010). There are many challenges that they face on a daily basis that often go unnoticed. In this piece of writing, I will discuss why I agree with Prince’s assertion that the Canadian disability policy is still a hit and miss affair and how government, activists, and disabled people

are involved in the making of a national disability policy.
Disability policies and whether or not they are serving every disabled person appropriately is a very contentious issue in Canada. First off, it is important to mention the WHO’s (World Health Organization) definition of disability which states that it is any limitation in performing tasks carried out by non-disabled individuals, it can include impairment or being handicapped, and people are either born with this or it develops over time (Merriam-Webster 2015). In 2006, it was reported that 14.3 percent of the Canadian population had a disability and this disability rate continues to climb as the population ages (Prince 2004). As more people are prone to disabilities, other factors of their life are affected such as the social activities they participate in, their work environment, income, and transportation. For example, disabled individuals often have lower levels of education, higher rates of unemployment, and lower income (Prince 2004). People with disabilities were less likely to obtain university degrees than non-disabled people which is 20.2 percent versus 40.7 percent, respectively (Stroumboulopoulos 2013). This could be due to the fact that some university buildings do not have the right access and accommodation for these individuals and disabled people might not feel as if they belong in that environment. The data shows that disabled people remain unemployed and under-employed at significantly greater levels than their non-disabled contemporaries. The disabled community are largely on the margins of the labour market. Unlike several other western democracies, such as the US, Britain and Australia, there is no explicit national disability policy in Canada. This shows that policies in place for the disabled are not working efficiently for these individuals to reach their full potential.
There are many trends based on gender and age group among the disabled Canadians. Disabled men between the ages of 15-64 earn $9,556 less than adult males without disabilities and women between that age group earn $$8,853 less (Stroumboulopoulos 2013). There is a significant wage gap between the disabled people and non-disabled, this could be due to the fact that companies do not value the work that disabled people do or underestimate their disability for weakness. According to Statistics Canada, women are more prone to disabilities; 44.5% of women reported a disability compared to 39.8% of men. In general, women are payed less than men, but both men and women with disabilities find it much harder to find well paying jobs. Ultimately, they are compelled to settle in jobs they may be over qualified for. According to the council of Canadians with Disabilities, almost 75 percent of women are unemployed or out of the labour market. This provides evidence that more people with disabilities are unemployed because their abilities are overlooked due to their disability, thus working in jobs that require less training than they have acquired. It is becoming increasingly difficult for these individuals to find a job and provide for their household. Furthermore, it has been reported that roughly 70 percent of small businesses have never hired a disabled individual (Stroumboulopoulos 2013). Many companies think of disabled people as threats to their organization and assume they are not fit for the job, but they are actually very much capable of exceeding their expectations and performing well on the job. The unemployment rate among disabled individuals is 10.6 percent, which is much higher than the non-disabled population at 6.8 percent (Hansen 2016). One explanation to justify these alarming discrepancies between the disabled and non-disabled is that many companies and businesses engage in practices that shut out disabled people. For example, one reason for the high unemployment rate among the disabled is that many employers insist on accepting only online applications, but the people with vision disability might not have access to the right type of software to complete the online process (Martin 2013). The government does not pay attention to the disabled peoples’ changing needs, these individuals are continuously faced with barriers that prevent them from participating or contributing as equal partners in society. This suggests that the disabled Canadians do not fit nicely into the categories for which policy makers categorize them in. Therefore, making the Canadian disability policy a hit and miss affair.
While the challenges of disabled adults is the main focus, it is important to note that they are not the only ones facing hardships. Child disability has been gaining more and more attention now. Before, children with disabilities were out of the eyes of society, lived in large institutions, and away from family (Hanvey 2002). Now, most disabled children live with their families, but this has not served them as an advantage of being active members in their communities. Their needs have been forgotten when addressing the needs of adults with disabilities. In Canada, about 4 percent of Canadian children between the ages of 5-14 are disabled (Kohen 2008). Furthermore, children living in low-income families are less likely to participate in structured recreational activities (Hanvey 2002). In addition, four in ten disabled children are not participating in community recreation activities as much as they would like (Hanvey 2002). This is mainly due to the government not allocating sufficient resources and support to render recreational activities more affordable for these families. There is a disconnection between the children with disabilities and their families from both the disability agenda and the national children’s agenda, further supporting Prince’s assertion.
The Canadian government admits that the needs of the disabled are not fully met.

However, the government officials also state that this is not solely their responsibility to ensure that all aspects of the agenda are met. Citizens of Canada should also participate and voice their concerns to achieve change in society. Generally, the main purpose of the disability social policy (DSP) was to create programs for the disabled, this is known as the government perception. It is highly evident that the government has not been successful in addressing the issues of the disabled community. For example, the National Strategy for the Integration of Persons with Disability from 1991-1996 was established by the deputy ministers to address issues of disabled people (Prince 2004). However, due to their lack of commitment the role would be passed down to other departmental officials, thus becoming an issue that is never taken care of (Prince 2004). The government has the power to make sure policies are implemented, but it also has the power to neglect issues. Furthermore, social movements conducted by activists influence the making of a national policy. These movements are usually defined as collective action of the less powerful social groups who share their point of view to the public in hopes of persuading decision makers (Ozen 2016). It is evident that activists and social movements are very much involved in the making of the national policy because they raise issues that are overlooked

by the government. Moreover, protest campaigns which are groups of individuals who attempt to attract attention of policy-makers are regarded as an influential factor in the agenda-setting stage of the policy making process (Ozen 2016). However, the impact of social movements and activists on policies is not just limited to influencing the agenda-setting process. For example, if these social organizations believe that an implementation of a policy is against their interests, they can prevent the implementation from occurring or put pressure to change the policy with their interests and demands. Lastly, people with disabilities themselves are involved in the making of a national disability policy. Many disabled people have formed their own organizations to represent themselves and their opinions. They redefine themselves as citizens who are entitled to the same rights as the non-disabled in Canada. Disabled people feel that they best know the needs and aspirations of disabled people and this makes sense because they are personally experiencing some form of disability. From the perspective of the disabled themselves, they believe that all disability groups should be integrated into a national disability policy that focuses on what people aspire or could aspire to do.
Canada needs an inclusive and accessible plan for the disabled people that includes the children, youth, adults, and seniors.

A national policy that addresses the issue of disability is called The National Action plan introduced by The Council of Canadians with disabilities (CCD). This plan would work with provinces across the nation and make sure that disabled Canadians and their families have the income, personal supports, and environmental accommodations that make social, economic, cultural, and political citizenship accessible and inclusive for all (Dolan 2009). This policy claims that people with disabilities will have all the necessary support to enable them to function in and contribute to the society. Canadian disability policies are fragmented and are part of general welfare-state policies (Jongbloed 2003). Thus, this policy must transcend from the traditional fragmented approach to disability. It must involve comprehensive short term and long term plans and decisive action to create a national environment in which people with disabilities can achieve their full potential. Each provincial policies vary and have their own way of defining what it means to have a disability. This policy states that it will make efforts to develop a joint strategy with all the provincial and territorial governments to meet the needs of Canadians with

disabilities.
In conclusion, according to advocates, legislative reports, and social policy makers the disabilities policies in place have failed to fully integrate disabled people of Canada in society. The government had promised a national plan for Canadians with Disabilities, but still it has no bill, no draft legislation, no committee, and no indication that this issue is anywhere on the political horizon. Thus, supporting Prince’s assertion that Canadian disability policy is a hit and miss affair. However, efforts for a national plan are now being discussed since the issue has been gaining tremendous attention. People with disabilities are voicing their opinions and claiming that a disability policy should be about what people aspire or could aspire to do rather than developing programs for the disabled based on a government perception. Collectively, change can be achieved and the making of a national disability policy might not be as implausible as it seems.