By Fatima Ali

For those of us who are not disability experts, it's clear as soon as you start to look into the issues that understandings and responses to disability vary widely and are very much context dependent. In the field of international protection, the approach to disability tends to reflect policy and decision-making practices within host states, as well as the understandings and ‘unconscious biases’ of decision-makers, legal representatives, and Country of Origin Information (COI) researchers. 

The lack of good quality COI on issues related to disability is at least partly related to the way international protection claims for persons with disabilities are often presented, for example with a narrow focus on medical responses to an impairment. The lack of relevant source material is itself linked to the limited visibility of persons with disabilities within societies globally.

These issues have been repeatedly raised with Asylos and ARC Foundation. For example, lawyers representing Nigerians with dependent children with disabilities and unaccompanied children with disabilities seeking asylum identified a critical information gap on this topic. A subsequent review of COI reports on Nigeria found limited information relating to persons with disabilities, and specifically on children and young people with disabilities. This significant information gap risks the refusal of cases involving persons with disabilities because of a lack of relevant evidence that might support their protection claim. 

In response to the issues raised by legal representatives and thanks to funding from the Paul Hamlyn Foundation, ARC Foundation and Asylos developed a joint project to address information gaps about persons with disabilities who are seeking international protection, focusing initially on children and young people with disabilities in Nigeria as a case-study. You can learn more about the project here. 

In this blog we share some of our key research tips from the training:

Five tips for disability-focused COI research:

1. Take an intersectional approach to disability research: proactively seek out and illustrate how a person’s impairment intersects with other identities and potential sources of social disadvantage. Consider issues such as age, race/ethnicity, gender, own socioeconomic status, family socioeconomic and disability status.

Definition: What is intersectionality? Intersectionality encourages an understanding of people as being shaped by the interaction of different social locations, such as race/ ethnicity, indigeneity, gender, class, sexuality, geography, age, migration status, religion etc. These interactions occur within specific contexts, of connected systems and structures of power. Examples include State and non-State legislation and policies, religious institutions, the media and families.  Intersectional discrimination refers to a situation in which people are discriminated against on different grounds which, taken together, result in a level of prejudice or persecution that is higher than if these different grounds were considered separately. This contrasts with additive discrimination, where the different grounds can be broken down and considered separately. Both intersectional discrimination and additive discrimination can be seen as different kinds of multiple discrimination.

2. Use disability-specific sources: Disability is a very broad and complex topic and the realities of people with disabilities are frequently under documented or misrepresented. It can therefore be challenging to find relevant or accurate information. Ensure close attention to and wherever possible use disability specific sources of info and you might find it helpful to look at disability specific sources on the ground (NGOs charities etc) in the country of research. ARC Foundation has published a collection of relevant COI sources, which can be found by downloading the Thematic COI Sources Toolkit and navigating to the ‘medical’ tab to help you get started in your research. 

3. Use a broad range of relevant terminology: Consider using some of the disability-specific search terms we listed below, and pay particular attention to terms that are commonly used in the context that you are researching. Look far beyond the word ‘disability’ or obvious derivatives and use a broad range of search terms, even those that may be considered offensive or inappropriate. 

Examples of English disability keywords, individually or in strings, could include:  

abnormal, afflict*, infirm*, albino*, amput*, autism, blind, care home, challenged, communic*, cripp*, deaf, deficit*, develop*, different, disab*, disor*, downs*, dumb*, dwarf, eye*, guardian*, handicap*, HIV, impair*, impediment*, inclusive ed*, ill*, injure*, insan*, institut*, intellectual, invalid, lame*, limb, limit*, mad, mental (health, capacity), paralysis, people with disabilities, persons with disabilities, physical, psycho*, rehabilitate, restrict*,  sense*, sick, smitten*, special (education, home, needs, etc.),  suffer*, visual*, weak, wound*. 

You should look far beyond the word ‘disability’ or obvious derivatives and use a broad range of search terms, even those that may be considered offensive or inappropriate.

Dignity and humanity:  The language you use to describe persons with disabilities and their experience should respect their dignity and humanity. Try, for example, to speak of ‘persons with disabilities' rather than ‘handicapped people'. Nonetheless, accept that alternative terminology, which might be considered offensive to many, should be included within reports if used by sources of information, so as to ensure the report accurately captures approaches and responses to disability within the locality or country of origin in question.

4. Be attentive to stigma in your research: Seek information on forms and impacts of disability and on the stigma attached to it and to relating vulnerabilities. Include sources that might draw attention to it and explain any gaps in relevant information. 

Definition Stigma is …? A mark of disgrace associated with a particular circumstance, quality, person or group of persons.  A set of negative or unfair beliefs that a society or group has about something or someone.6. Include voices of those with lived experience, especially where gaps in COI have been identified. In these circumstances reach out to persons with disabilities and organisations led by persons with disabilities, ideally in the country or with expertise on the disability you are researching.

5. Include voices of those with lived experience, especially where gaps in COI have been identified. In these circumstances reach out to persons with disabilities and organisations led by persons with disabilities, ideally in the country or with expertise on the disability you are researching.

Quote ‘If you went into a community that was absent of children, people would notice and ask ‘Where are the children?’ When you go into a community and there were no women, people would notice, ‘Where are the women?’ When you go into a community and there were no men, people would ask, ‘Where are the men?’ But when you go into a community and you don’t see people with visible disabilities, in most parts of the world, people are still not asking ‘Where are the disabled people in your community?’  This quote is taken from this 4.43 minute clip ‘Nothing about us without us’. You can watch it in full at: https://youtu.be/wsfuvqyW2M0.

To learn more about our disability-focused research project and the different outputs that we produced, read our corresponding disability project page. 

Access Project Page

If your organisation is interested in disability-COI research related training, get in touch with [email protected]