• This topic has 6 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 1 year, 4 months ago by Dorothy Nakato Mubezi.
Viewing 6 reply threads
  • Author
    • #5668

      Persons with disabilities face disability related costs to achieve daily living activities and participation in community. Those costs are related to good and services that they may require in relation to health condition, functional difficulties, and the barriers in their environment. They can be direct costs such as assistive devices, using taxi because public transport is not available or accessible, sign language interpreters, rehabilitation… They can also be linked to loss of opportunity to earn income for their family members who may have to stop working to provide them support.

      The more persons with disabilities seek participation (going to school, working, taking part in community and public life…) the more costs they face (more transport, diverse assistive devices, greater need for interpretation and human assistance). Today in many low and middle income, most those costs are unaffordable for persons with disabilities and their families which contribute greatly to restriction of participation, isolation and poverty.

      Addressing disability related costs is therefore a pre-condition to significantly reduce inequalities and poverty as well as support access of persons with disabilities to health, education and employment by 2030.

      Removing barriers in the environment, for instance by making infrastructures, transport and services more accessible or ensuring that services and workplace provide reasonable accommodation would go a long way decrease disability extra costs faced by persons with disabilities and their families. While critical, such policies have impact in the long term and may be also challenging in contexts with higher informal economy where state regulations can have limited impact.

      Social protection has a key role to play in addressing those disability costs by providing support to individuals in different ways: cash transfer such as disability allowances, concessions such fee waivers, high subsidies on transportation, as well as provision of support services (see related question of the month). Together with Universal Health Coverage policies, it can address direct health care costs, including rehabilitation and assistive devices. However, while more countries are considering such support, in 2017 less than 20% of persons with significant disabilities were accessing disability benefits in low- and middle-income countries.

    • #5676
      Roy Yerkes

        We should have to create some nonprofit Organizations to help them LIKE TLC. 

      • #5716
        Chansamone chasuakao

          It’s still a long way to go, example in my country – Laos. the persons with disabilities still not included in the formal system support – means discriminations – they still not been covered in the social security fund as others. What about the consideration for adding extra cost for disability – it needs to go step by step – breaking the wall to create  opportunity first then go to the equal support as others then specific additional supports –

        • #5763

          Yes, Chansamone, discrimination is a problem, so also can be the unintended consequences of social protection policies that don’t take an inclusive approach. For example, defining disability as the “inability to work” creates an incentive to not work, and to strengthen the attitude that people with disabilities can’t work. Instead of thinking of disability benefits as “income replacement” they should be structured to support participation by covering the extra costs of disability. Determining those costs can be tricky. Here is a link to a paper of ours that talks about the methodology:



        • #5787
          Sophie Mitra

            There is evidence of higher costs for families with disabilities including higher health-related expenditures, assistance with daily care costs, and transportation costs. Universal health coverage policies, making public transportation more accessible and subsidizing care and transportation costs may be effective at reducing extra costs.

          • #5818
            Bagival Pradeep

              Having worked within the government, this question used to repeatedly surface before  State Coordination Committee headed by the Minister in -charge of disability affairs in India. In some of the L/MICs , public transport services have been subsidized or provided free of charges. But persons with physical disabilities often find these services inaccessible due to barriers they face.

              Given the fact that many LMICs are unable to allocate adequate resources to  social protection for persons with disabilities  on account of competing priorities, there has to be exemption /waiver of the cost of  public services  for certain ‘benchmark’ disabilities.  Majority of persons affected by rare diseases experience disability resulting in limitations in Activities of Daily Living (ADL) and irrespective of their income level, struggle to meet medical expenses related to their treatment.  For instance, some of the progressive provincial governments in India have created an exclusive health fund for persons with disabilities from low income group to access medicines and other health related services that are expensive in nature and associated with rare diseases.

              While legislations in many low/middle income countries ( S.E. Asia)  have subsidized education/health services  for persons with disabilities , the provisions of the law often remain unimplemented and therefore there is a need for anti-discrimination commissions to be established and should function proactively to ensure social protection measures are disability-inclusive. I have meet families of persons with disabilities in S.E. Asia who were constrained to go to neighboring countries for rehabilitation services as the services were  not available in their country and this ‘out of pocket expenditure’ had resulted in families falling back in poverty. The national govts need to take ownership of  strengthening their health and rehabilitation services so that families of persons with disabilities do not have to incur out of pocket expenditure for health related services.

              Tax exemptions such as Income tax/Profession tax for persons with disabilities and their families has been a significant step in some countries that has enabled families to meet disability related costs. Many countries have made provision for ‘Disability Fund’ and through public-private partnership to garner resources so that families of persons with disabilities with low income could be supported to meet additional expenses.

              Social protection programmes  result in enhancement of productivity and employability of persons with disabilities and thereby resulting in economic empowerment. National social protection policies should be fully disability- compliant with express provisions to support persons with disabilities and their families. Most importantly, through political will and leadership of the executive office in charge of disability affairs, governments  in LMICs  should ensure social protection policies and practices  are able to address  day-to-day challenges faced by persons with disabilities and their families.

            • #5819
              Dorothy Nakato Mubezi

                The best and most practical steps that low and middle income countries can take to support persons with disabilities to cover the diversity of their disability related costs by 2030.

                Example of disability related costs:

                Direct costs

                Specific disability expenditures

                • Assistive Devices and Personal Assistance
                • Rehabilitation/Habilitation/Vocational Rehabilitation
                • Housing Modifications, Special vehicles

                Sign language interpretation, Braille books

                Extra expenditures on general items

                • Health care
                • Extra transportation (e.g. taxis)

                Housing premiums (location, accessibility

                Indirect costs

                Less employment opportunities

                Less education opportunities

                Lower earnings of

                people with disabilities

                Loss of earning or education opportunities for family members who are care givers.

                Given the fact that many LMICs are unable to allocate adequate resources to  social protection for persons with disabilities  on account of competing priorities and the scarce resources, it is still challenging for Governments to cover disability related costs. However, they should take the following steps:

                • Disability specific support;This gives high level of support to persons with disabilities and it covers a small population which I believe LMICs can manage.

                This calls for combined the support to overcome barriers (can decrease with more inclusive    environment) as well as support inherent to the personal functional limitation (permanent)

                • Assistive devices, rehabilitation (benefit persons with disabilities but also people with injury, older persons …). Is required now and and will always be necessary
                • LMICs should provide accessible and inclusive basic services for all: inclusive education, health, justice, infrastructure and information, transports, basic income security …This has a low level of support but covers greater population of persons with disabilities and will ultimately have a big impact but will take a lot of time.
                • LMICs should explore both in cash and in-kind support to persons with disabilities to be able to cover the diversity of their disability related costs.


            Viewing 6 reply threads
            • The topic ‘What are the best and most practical steps that low and middle income countries can take to support persons with disabilities to cover the diversity of their disability related costs by 2030?’ is closed to new replies.