Fate, charity and differently able persons
- The Sangai Express Editorial :: March 25 2015 -

Indeed it would be a soothing balm for the odd 721 differently able persons of the State, and of course their families.

Yes, Union Minister of Social Justice and Empowerment Thawarchand Gehlot is currently in the State capital and he did not come empty handed.

He came with a heavy baggage of artificial limbs, hearing aids, DAISY (Digital Accessible Information System) players, mobile phones, laptops and other gadgets/appliances which he distributed to differently able persons, often referred to as disabled or handicapped persons quite bluntly.

Certainly Mr Gehlot has struck the right chord by generously providing aids and appliances to differently able persons, and many of them and their families might be praying for the Minister’s good fortune in gratitude.

The concerns, empathy and generosity shown by the Minister deserve appreciation. He went a step ahead by promising to set up a hospital for SC, OBC and differently able persons provided the State Government gives the necessary plot.

We don’t think the State Government would have any difficulty in exploring a suitable site for the hospital promised by the Union Minister.

Definitely, an exclusive hospital for differently able persons would be another asset of the State.

Again, there was not an iota of ambiguity when Mr Gehlot stated that the Government of India would be more than willing to open an old age home and a sports centre for differently able persons.

He then threw the ball in the court of the State Government quite courteously by categorically stating that the plots required for the old age home as well as the sports centre should be provided by the State Government.

At the moment, the ball is in the court of the State Government and now it is up to the wisdom of the incumbent Government whether or not to exploit this rare offer for long term benefits to the people of Manipur, specially aged people and differently able persons.

So far, so good and we are hoping for the best possible deals between the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment and the State Government.

Mind you, empty promises and politicians often turn out to be two sides of the same coin, at least in Manipur, if not in the whole country. This is something we don’t expect from Mr Gehlot.

Obviously, everybody would welcome distribution of kits, aids and appliances to differently able persons.

But the moot question is. Is this enough? Are the Government of India and the State Government doing enough to address all the mental and physical problems of differently able persons? Kits and appliances distributed today would be a big relief to the beneficiaries for the time being.

But to be frank, we don’t think such appliances can address the trauma, stigma and social injustice suffered by differently able persons.

Government policy, legislative actions, schemes and provisions for the disabled give the impression of a State that is committed to human rights and equal opportunities.

But the ground reality tells a very different story. Most people continue to believe that disability is either an irremediable medical condition or an act of fate.

In both cases, the onus of care rests with the family of the disabled and not on the community. Myths and misconceptions about disability are galore, causing the disabled to be ostracised, isolated and marginalised.

The legal definitions or the Persons with Disability Act 1995 view disability strictly from the medical and/or psychometric perspective.

This ends up reinforcing a medical model of intervention rather than the much-needed community-based rehabilitation. This is one area where the Government must put on its thinking cap.

Vast majority of people view disability as matter of charity rather than a human rights issue. The charity perspective purportedly reflects care and tolerance but at the same time, it promotes dependency among the disabled.

On the other hand, the disabled and their families are compelled to accept their hardship with fortitude as a matter of unavoidable fate.

Such is the general social attitude towards the disabled or to use the more fashionable euphemism ‘differently able persons’.

What the Government and the general public must understand is that differently able persons need accommodation in all public spheres as rightful, equal partners.

Neither fate can be an alibi nor can charity be any solution.

This is a serious human rights issue, and the Government must first acknowledge this fact before embarking on any journey to resolve major issues pertaining to differently able persons.