Disabled youth and citizenship: opportunities, constraints and actions

A/Prof Theresa Lorenzo

Disability Studies Programme

Faculty of Health Sciences, UCT

Oral submission for parliamentary portfolio committee

25 July 2012

Study population

• Surveyed nine sites in five South African provinces.

• Fieldworkers interviewed 989 youth (18 - 35 years);

• Sample: 523 (52.9%) disabled youth (DY), 466 (47.1%) non-disabled youth (NDY)

Data Collection

• Questionnaire consisted of seven sections including demographics and

• 5 categories of livelihood assets: – human assets (health, education, employment ),– social assets (social support systems and use of

free time), – financial assets (and other sources of income), – physical assets (living situation, facilities and

services) and natural assets (resource-based activities, e.g. gathering firewood and vegetation).

• Closing questions

Opportunities

• Doctors at hospitals and nurses at clinics are health professionals most frequently seen.

• Both groups received the same amount of support from immediate household members

• Significant difference btwn 2 groups related to friendships and intimate partners

• NDY spent significantly more time engaging in all free-time activities.

• DY asks specifically for more sport and recreation facilities in communities

Opportunities 2

• Majority of DY indicated that social security grants were the main source of income, whereas NDY received salaries or wages.

• NDY reported more access to– phone, and newspapers, – public services – business sector.

Opportunities 3

• Primary dwelling for both groups was some form of brick home with availability of a toilet in the house or access to water facilities, electricity, television, and radio.

• NDY had significantly greater access to police, municipal services, labour, banks, internet cafés and post offices

• Smaller number in both groups reported farming.

Constraints

• Far fewer DY than NDY attended and completed school. Minimal accessed HEI

• Both groups indicated financial reasons as the chief barriers to completing school.

• Unemployment was markedly more common among DY than among NDY.

• Barriers for DY were poor health and lack of skills development as well as lack of job opportunities. The latter was primary barriers for NDY.

Constraints 2.

• Less awareness of community rehabilitation workers, home-based carers and rehabilitation therapists.

• Lack of knowledge of social services and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) for both groups

• Participation and access were limited for both groups because of inaccessible public transport.

• Fewer DY reported access to land/fields as a resource

Actions

• DPOs including parent organisations

• Government departments

• NGOs and civil society alliances

• Faith Based Organisations

• Higher education institutions

• Other?

Recommendations: Accessibility

• Use all forms of media to disseminate information on services, opportunities and resources and better co-ordinating across sectors

• Transportation –need public-private partnerships with taxis, buses, trains

• Dial-A-Ride; get govt to fund properly- hold them accountable

• More sport and recreation facilities in communities for social inclusion

Recommendations: Health

• Implement Screening, Intervention, Assessment, Support document for collaboration be Social Development, Health, Education

• Make transport and others resources for outreach available

Recommendations: Rehabilitation

• Availability of rehab therapists in rural areas scarce

• Address power dynamics to change systems and

• Make rehab managers and services more available and accessible

• Job descriptions of rehab managers at district level are non existent

• Decision making boards need rehab and disability representation

Recommendations: Education

• Retention through school system and access to Further Education and Training and Higher Education Institutions

• Financial support needed

• Accessible transport needed

Recommendations: Higher education institutions and curricula

• Making information and resources about disability services available for all HEI programmes

• Higher education to adapt curricula of all disciplines and programmes in all faculties; expose lecturers to lived experiences of persons with disabilities and their families

• Integrate disability issues into policy processes and research

Acknowledgements

• Research team and fieldworkers

• Respondents

• Funding from SANPAD, UCT and NRF

• Participants at community dissemination workshops

• Authors of papers