CHAPTER TWO
2.2 Disability in perspective
2.2.3 Disability in Nigeria
Disability is an evolving concept with no universally agreed definition. However, drawing from
‗Article 1‘ of the CRPD, disability can be defined as long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairment which, in interaction with various barriers, may hinder one‘s full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others (UN, 2006). Yet, being a social construct, the definition of disability and how PWD are perceived and treated varies according to culture, social norms, time, attitudes and existing policies. What is accepted as a disability in one place and time may be different in others.
In Nigeria, disability is often associated with visible loss of or defect in parts of the body. That‘s why somebody in Nigeria with a mild impairment like short-sightedness will not be regarded as having a disability. However, this is problematic. Such people have impaired vision but are seldom or only marginally excluded from participating in society life. Another example is people with albinism, who, despite the fact that they have a skin condition (impairment) that makes other people discriminate against them, are never considered to have a disability. Furthermore, in Nigeria this group does not identify with PWD. Rather, they form a different association to address the discrimination that they face and to affirm their separate identity.
24 Societal attitudes in Nigeria make some people not want to identify with disability. In many Nigerian cultures, PWD are looked down upon regardless of their level of education or affluence.
For example, the Yoruba people will say ‗irinisi ohun ni isenilojo‘ (your appearance determines the kind of respect you are accorded). So, if someone has an impairment and does not meet the societal expectation of ‗normality‘, s/he is immediately assigned a sickly and/or low status role, even when such person is wealthier/healthier than those judging him/her. Abang (1988) notes the unequal opportunities afforded PWD among the Yoruba tribe by affirming that PWD are not allowed to become kings, irrespective of their position in the society. Typical reactions to such people vary from pity and low expectations to hatred.
In addition, in Yoruba folklore evil spirits are usually depicted as having impairments/missing body parts such as an eye, a leg or having unusually thin limbs. This reflects the belief of the people and this is applied to persons with impairments. Hence, they are seen as people who are evil, are being punished by the gods due to their sins in a previous life or those of their parents, or as having broken a taboo, either intentionally or unintentionally (Ademokoya & Ben-Stowe, 2007). This can be explained by Nicholis‘s (1993) assertion that ‗social solidarity is a primary value and Africans tend to see a correlation between illness and social distance‘. According to Ademokoya and Ben-Stowe (2007), this can be prevented by expectant parents paying attention to cultural regulations. Similarly, Nicholis (1993) points out that the Igede people of Benue State in Nigeria believe that a child born with deformity is a contradiction of the natural order of creation, which is pure. In times past, such children were therefore killed at birth because they were perceived to be dangerous to the society.
Pregnant women in Nigeria hardly want to interact with PWD due to the belief that the ‗evil spirit‘ in that person could replace their ‗normal‘ foetuses so that they give birth to babies with impairments. In fact, one of the research assistants for this study, a married woman of reproductive age, commented that she would not have taken part in the study if she had been pregnant at the time because she didn‘t want to give birth to a child with disability. Apart from being viewed as bringing shame to the family, Mallory (1993) points out that children with disability are considered to be of low value because they are likely to be a drain on the family resources and will not be able to financially contribute to the family. Thus, it is not surprising
25 that parents in Nigeria sometimes abandon children with deformities, or give them to grandparents who are willing to care for them.
However, Nicholis (1993) argues that Nigerian traditional beliefs do not always equate disability with evildoing or witchcraft. He relates that they are more tolerant of disability resulting from life experiences like accidents and take good care of such people. Nicholis (1993) further points out that Yoruba history also records that Obatala is a deity that was involved with creation, and that he was drunk on the day that he created the albinos, the crippled and the blind. As a result, the worshippers of Obatala have special regard for people with these kinds of disability.
However, the undertone remains that they are ‗abnormal‘ people created by mistake because a deity acted irresponsibly.
Furthermore, Abang (1988) notes that the Hausa tribe in Northern Nigeria possess a more positive attitude towards disability, which is seen as the will of God, hence there exists the need to treat PWD with kindness. She also relates a Tiv (tribe predominantly residing in the middle- belt of Nigeria) folk tale in which the first chief of the land enacted a law ‗that no deformed children should be born anywhere except in his village where they could be cared for as was their custom‘.
Nevertheless, it is possible that more people in Nigeria may want to identify with disability if there are special benefits as a result of functional disability policy and laws, as is the case in a few African countries. As such, the definition of disability in Nigeria may become broader, accommodating those who, for now, do not want to come under that umbrella. Presently, however, there is nothing attractive about having a disability in Nigeria. On the contrary, the associated discrimination and stigma is highly undesirable and puts people off identifying with PWD.
The discriminatory attitudes described above are reflected in the way the Nigerian government handles matters related to disability and PWD. The lack of political will to improve the lives of Nigerians with disability is demonstrative of the beliefs and attitudes of the larger society where PWD are treated with contempt rather than as equal citizens.
26 2.2.4 Government approach to disability in Nigeria
Availability of good quality data is central to the formulation and implementation of policies.
Mont (2007) laments that ‗high quality, internationally comparable data on disability that is important for the planning, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of inclusive policies is often not available.‘ This is particularly the case in developing countries of Africa, where disability statistics are often non-existent or unreliable. He further stresses that it is difficult to estimate disability prevalence statistics that are understandable and internationally comparable due to the varied utilisation of different disability definitions, methodologies of data collection and variation in the quality of study design. In addition, he argues that there is further complication because there is no single correct disability definition; the nature and severity of disability greatly varies and the measurements of disability differ depending on the purpose it is intended for.
The United Nations estimates that about 600 million people live with disability globally (UN, 1993) and that 10.0% of any population has some form of disability. According to Mont (2007), the UN 10.0% estimate is in line with data from developed countries and recent studies from developing countries, which suggest 10.0-12.0% prevalence. However, Fujifura, Park, and Rutkowski-Kmitta (2005) argue that the new global prevalence of 600 million is just a revision based on the controversial 10.0% estimate. In addition, persons living in the developing countries are more exposed to conditions that result in disability than those in the developed countries due to lack of good healthcare, war, poverty etc. This is corroborated by Helander‘s (1998) claim that an estimated 80.0% of PWD live in developing nations.
Nigeria is a developing country with a population of about 140 million. The leading causes of disability in the country include communicable and non-communicable diseases, poor healthcare services, road traffic accidents, poverty and conflicts. According to the 1991 census, prevalence of disability in Nigeria was 0.5%. Questions based on a checklist of impairments were adopted.
According to Mbogoni (2002), this method has been shown to yield very low estimates of disability prevalence (less than 2.5%) because the focus was on severe types of impairments whose prevalence is low in the general population. She further reported that the broad categories used were:
27 Nature of disability
Not disabled
Deaf
Dumb
Deaf and dumb
Blind
Crippled
Mentally retarded/lunatic
Other: specify
Apart from the questions being focused on severe impairments whose prevalence is usually low, careful analysis of the language of the questions suggests that many households would not declare if they had persons that fell into any of the categories. The language was ‗labelling‘ and derogatory and, in Nigeria, where disability is highly stigmatised, this method was likely to have introduced response bias into the census, thereby contributing to the low prevalence reported.
Similarly, the Nigeria 2006 census included disability codes but the response rate was very poor (Fujifura, Rutkowski-Kmitta, Owens, Corbin, & Mersereau, n.d.). As such, the country currently does not have a reliable national disability statistic, and this compounds the problem of planning and evaluating services provided by the public sector (Lang & Upah, 2008). Although such data is critical for policy-making, it is not an excuse for not making provisions that will ensure equality between Nigerians with and without disability.
The Nigerian government responded to the Standard Rules on Equalization of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities by enacting a civil anti-discrimination law called the Nigerians with Disabilities Decree (NDD) 1993 (‗Nigerians with Disability Decree‘, 1993), which has never been implemented. This is not surprising as its foundation is not appropriate, and it looks more like a quick-fix. The instrument defined disabled persons as (‗Nigerians with Disability Decree‘, 1993):
A person who has received preliminary or permanent certificate of disability to have condition which is expected to continue permanently or for a considerable length of time
28 which can reasonably be expected to limit the person‘s functional ability substantially, but not limited to seeing, hearing, thinking, ambulating, climbing, descending, lifting, grasping, rising, any related function or any limitation due to weakness or significantly decreased endurance so that he cannot perform his everyday routine, living and working without significantly increased hardship and vulnerability to everyday obstacles and hazards.
To start with, it says ‗the person is vulnerable to obstacles and hazards due to [a] condition which limits his [or her] functional ability,‘ suggesting that impairment is the cause of disability. It also gives authority to a physician to confirm disability. Therefore, this definition fails to recognise the role of political choices in shutting persons with impairments out of mainstream life.
Moreover, NDD covers areas such as health, education, vocational rehabilitation and employment, housing, accessibility, transportation, social services, sports and recreation, telecommunications, and voting access. It makes provision for legal services by planning to establish a National Commission for People with Disabilities for the enforcement of the provisions made in the decree. As a follow-up to the decree, two Bills for Acts to establish a National Commission for Handicapped Persons and to provide special facilities for use by handicapped persons in public buildings have been waiting to be passed into law in the National Assembly since 2000. Though the decree makes vague statements without mapping out the strategies to be adopted and implemented, it fails to state what constitutes discrimination or equality and, 16 years down the line, the Commission to enforce its provisions is yet to be established.
Consequently, Nigerians with disability face institutional, architectural, attitudinal, educational, transport-related and informational barriers on a daily basis. No provisions are made for integration and inclusion of PWD. Segregation and marginalisation still flourish because disability is perceived as being more of a charity than a human rights issue. As a result, from the public-policy perspective, there is a prevailing attitude that PWD should be ‗cared for‘ (Lang &
Upah, 2008). The authors note that the public policy environment in Nigeria is characterised by a lack of accountability and transparency in public service delivery, which poses a challenge to the
29 rights-based approach to disability issues necessary to facilitate and promote social inclusion of Nigerians with disability.