What does being disabled mean – International Day of Disabled Persons
Introduction
December marks the International Day of Persons with Disabilities, a moment that encourages societies to reflect on how they understand, support, and value disabled individuals. In the United Kingdom, the legally recognised term is “Disabled,” rather than alternatives such as “Differently Abled” or “Special Child.” This terminology carries legal and social implications. According to the UK Government, a person is considered disabled under the Equality Act 2010 if they have a physical or mental impairment that has a “substantial” and “long-term” adverse effect on their ability to carry out normal daily activities.
However, the Equality Act 2010 does more than define disability—it raises deeper questions about how disability is perceived within society. As my own research demonstrated, if disability is fundamentally a human experience, one that many individuals will encounter directly or indirectly during their lives, why do so many non-disabled individuals remain hesitant to engage with it? This discomfort invites multiple interpretations. Williams and Mavin (2012, p. 160) argue that social groups often resist the full inclusion of persons with disabilities. Harlan and Robert’s (1998) work, cited within Williams and Mavin (2012), explores how disabled individuals are constructed as the “other,” a label that keeps them separate from dominant norms. From a social constructivist perspective, Morgan (1986) suggests that organisations adapt to their environments; consequently, the norms and values they develop tend to privilege able-bodied expectations (Baig, 2025). This leaves disabled people positioned at the margins of organisational and social life.
Social Context: Learning from the Past
This understanding forces us to confront a difficult but essential question: can we learn from the mistakes of the past regarding social inclusion? Throughout history, disabled individuals have been socially excluded through segregation, stigma, and limited access to education, employment, and public life. Even as societies claim progress, historical attitudes often linger beneath the surface. Many museums, policies, and institutions still reflect able-bodied assumptions that were dominant decades ago.
Learning from the past requires acknowledging that exclusion was not accidental—it was systemic. Disabled people were often perceived as dependent, incapable of contributing economically, or in need of charity rather than empowerment. These narratives shaped generations of public policy and community attitudes, leaving a legacy that modern organisations continue to grapple with. Social inclusion today requires more than symbolic recognition; it demands a re-examination of the cultural, political, and organisational norms that continue to shape attitudes.
Ethnic Minority Experiences: The Intersection of Disability and Culture
Understanding disability in the UK is incomplete without recognising the unique experiences of ethnic minority communities. Disability intersects with culture, religion, language, migration histories, and socioeconomic barriers. In some communities, disability is still surrounded by stigma or interpreted through spiritual or cultural frameworks that discourage open discussion. As a result, families may feel pressure to manage disability privately rather than seek professional support.
Ethnic minority disabled individuals often experience a double marginalisation: first as disabled, and second as members of a minority culture that may already face racial or socio-economic inequality. These layers of identity shape how individuals navigate support systems, communicate with institutions, and feel represented within public services. They also impact confidence, disclosure, and trust in both healthcare and workplace structures. Meaningful inclusion, therefore, requires culturally sensitive approaches that recognise that disability is not experienced the same way across all communities.
Sexuality, LGBTQ+ Identities, and Disability: Overlooked Intersections
Another crucial yet often overlooked dimension of disability inclusion involves sexuality and LGBTQ+ identities. Disabled individuals who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer frequently navigate what scholars describe as a triple marginalisation: discrimination based on disability, stigma related to sexuality or gender identity, and societal assumptions that deny their autonomy or agency.
Historically, disabled people have often been desexualised, viewed as asexual, or seen as lacking the capacity to form intimate relationships. These misconceptions not only distort public understanding but can have real consequences—limiting access to inclusive sexual education, healthcare, and relationship support. For LGBTQ+ disabled individuals, these barriers are compounded by the fact that many mainstream LGBTQ+ spaces are not physically accessible or culturally inclusive of disability.
Within ethnic minority communities, discussions around sexuality can be further constrained by cultural taboos, religious norms, or family expectations. When disability is added to this context, individuals may feel intense pressure to conceal their identity, limit self-expression, or avoid seeking support altogether. This layered invisibility contributes to higher risks of isolation, mental health struggles, and exclusion from both disability and LGBTQ+ advocacy spaces.
Workplace cultures also play a role. LGBTQ+ disabled employees may hesitate to disclose either identity for fear that doing so will result in stereotyping, bias, or being viewed as “difficult” or “too complex.” The challenge is not simply about disclosure; it is about whether organisations create environments where employees feel safe to bring their full selves to work. Inclusive leadership must therefore recognise intersectionality—not treating disability, race, culture, sexuality, or gender identity as separate categories, but as interconnected aspects of lived experience.
A genuinely inclusive society requires acknowledging that disabled LGBTQ+ individuals exist, that their experiences are valid, and that their needs must be considered in policies, services, and community spaces. Only by addressing these intersecting identities can we ensure that inclusion is not partial or selective but genuinely comprehensive.
Conclusion
The International Day of Persons with Disabilities invites reflection but also action. Understanding disability through the lens of law, social theory, culture, and workplace dynamics reveals a clear message: inclusion is not a one-time achievement, but an ongoing responsibility. It requires learning from historical mistakes, acknowledging cultural differences, and transforming organisational practices. Ensuring that disabled individuals—across all backgrounds—are valued and supported is not only a matter of equality but a measure of our collective social progress.
