disability statistics in measuring some gender dimensions: case india s chakrabarti deputy director...
Post on 27-Mar-2015
215 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Disability Statistics in Disability Statistics in Measuring Some Gender Measuring Some Gender
Dimensions:Dimensions:Case IndiaCase India
S ChakrabartiS ChakrabartiDeputy Director General Deputy Director General
CSO, Govt. of IndiaCSO, Govt. of India
ESA/STAT/AC.219/26ESA/STAT/AC.219/26
ObjectivesObjectives
Viewing the disability issueViewing the disability issueSize of the disabled –macro viewsSize of the disabled –macro viewsWhat some trends suggest- in terms What some trends suggest- in terms
of gender differentialsof gender differentialsEducation, Employment and family Education, Employment and family
living of the disabled men and living of the disabled men and womenwomen
conclusionconclusion
The Data The Data
NSS household survey data of 1981, 1991, NSS household survey data of 1981, 1991, 2002 2002
collected from sample households for all collected from sample households for all persons with persons with restrictions or lack of abilities restrictions or lack of abilities to perform an activity in the manner or to perform an activity in the manner or within the range considered normal for a within the range considered normal for a human beinghuman being
excluded illness/injury of recent origin excluded illness/injury of recent origin (morbidity) resulting into temporary loss of (morbidity) resulting into temporary loss of ability to see, hear, speak or moveability to see, hear, speak or move
Viewing the IssueViewing the Issue
Socio-economic dimensions of Socio-economic dimensions of disability in terms of the barriers that disability in terms of the barriers that disability conditions pose for free disability conditions pose for free access access to basic services and the to basic services and the consequential degree of social consequential degree of social marginalization among persons with marginalization among persons with different types of disability, with different types of disability, with differences on account of gender, differences on account of gender, caste, rural/ urban background etc.caste, rural/ urban background etc.
Prevalence burdenPrevalence burden
Prevalence of disability per 1,00,000 persons for each sex and sectorPrevalence of disability per 1,00,000 persons for each sex and sector
Type Of DisabilityType Of Disability
Disabled Persons Per 1,00,000 PersonsDisabled Persons Per 1,00,000 Persons
RuralRural UrbanUrban MaleMale FemaleFemale All PersonsAll Persons
Mental RetardationMental Retardation9292 100100 115115 7272 9494
Mental IllnessMental Illness110110 8989 122122 8686 105105
BlindnessBlindness210210 140140 171171 214214 192192
Low VisionLow Vision8686 5454 6868 8787 7777
Hearing DisabilityHearing Disability310310 236236 296296 285285 291291
Speech DisabilitySpeech Disability210210 187187 237237 169169 204204
Locomotor DisabilityLocomotor Disability10461046 901901 12171217 785785 10081008
Any DisabilityAny Disability 18461846 14991499 20002000 14931493 17551755
Comparison of prevalence Comparison of prevalence sizessizes
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
Vision Speech
MaleFemaleAll
Hearing Movement
Vision disabilityVision disability Slow decline between 1981 Slow decline between 1981
& 1991 followed by sharper & 1991 followed by sharper drop between 1991 & 2002 drop between 1991 & 2002 – possibly measures had – possibly measures had effecteffect
Rural decline faster than Rural decline faster than urban decline between urban decline between 1981 & 20021981 & 2002
Decline in prevalence of Decline in prevalence of Women’s disability in vision Women’s disability in vision (51% in rural & 46% in (51% in rural & 46% in urban) compared men’s urban) compared men’s (44% in urban and 38% in (44% in urban and 38% in rural) contributed to faster rural) contributed to faster decline for rural areasdecline for rural areas
Male-Female gap is Male-Female gap is narrowingnarrowing -8(2010) from -50 (2002)--8(2010) from -50 (2002)-
ruralrural -48(2010) from -65 (2002)--48(2010) from -65 (2002)-
urbanurban
Prevalence of Vision Disability
553525
296
356
302
194
670
548
326
444471
276
425
346
228
294263
163
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
1981 1991 2002
Year
No
. pe
r 10
0,00
0 p
op
ln
ruralurban
Female-rural
Male-rural
Female-urbanMale-urban
Males = 251 (2010 rural) =137 (2010 urban)
Females = 259 (2010 rural) = 185 (2010 urban)
Hearing disabilityHearing disability Rural decline (40%) faster Rural decline (40%) faster
than urban decline (35%) than urban decline (35%) between 1981 & 2002between 1981 & 2002
Decline in prevalence of Decline in prevalence of men’s disability in hearing men’s disability in hearing (33% in urban and 41% in (33% in urban and 41% in rural) compared to women’s rural) compared to women’s (35% in rural as well as (35% in rural as well as urban) contributed more to urban) contributed more to faster decline for rural faster decline for rural areasareas
Urban women’s hearing Urban women’s hearing disorder seems to be disorder seems to be converging to urban men’s converging to urban men’s level in prevalence level in prevalence
Male-Female gap narrowing Male-Female gap narrowing in rural areas, tooin rural areas, too 7(2010) from 19 (2002)-7(2010) from 19 (2002)-
ruralrural -7(2010) from -4 (2002)--7(2010) from -4 (2002)-
urbanurban
Prevalence of Hearing Disability
573
467
342
390
339
254
510
435
595
498
355
325 332
351
256
395
252
381
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
1981 1991 2002
Year
No
. per
100
,000
po
pl
rural
urban
Female-rual
Male-rural
Female-urban
Male-urban
Males = 293 (2010 rural) =217 (2010 urban)
Females = 286 (2010 rural) = 224 (2010 urban)
Speech disability (5yr+)Speech disability (5yr+) Rural decline (28%) slower Rural decline (28%) slower
than urban decline (31%) than urban decline (31%) between 1981 & 2002between 1981 & 2002
Decline in prevalence of Decline in prevalence of men’s disability in speech men’s disability in speech (33% in urban as well as in (33% in urban as well as in rural) compared to women’s rural) compared to women’s (19% in rural and 26% (19% in rural and 26% urban) contributed more to urban) contributed more to faster decline for urban faster decline for urban areasareas
Mainly a males’ problem, Mainly a males’ problem, particularly urban females particularly urban females have the least prevalencehave the least prevalence
Male-female gap tends to Male-female gap tends to decreasedecrease
52(2010) from 70 (2002)-52(2010) from 70 (2002)-ruralrural
58(2010) from 74 (2002)-58(2010) from 74 (2002)-urbanurban
Prevalence of Speech Disability
304
273
220
279
237
193
228
208
184
379
333
254
207
182
154
342
285
228
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
1981 1991 2002
Year
No
. per
100
,000
po
pln
rural
urban
Females-rural
Males-rural
Females-urban
Males-urban
Males = 222 (2010 rural) =196 (2010 urban)
Females = 170 (2010 rural) = 138 (2010 urban)
Movement disabilityMovement disability Prevalence is on the rise for Prevalence is on the rise for
men and women, rural or urbanmen and women, rural or urban Rural increase (26%) slower Rural increase (26%) slower
than urban increase (33%) than urban increase (33%) between 1981 & 2002between 1981 & 2002
Increase in prevalence of men’s Increase in prevalence of men’s disability in movement (32% in disability in movement (32% in urban and 22% in rural) urban and 22% in rural) compared to women’s (58% in compared to women’s (58% in rural and 34% urban) tends to rural and 34% urban) tends to make women’s problem more make women’s problem more an issue in near futurean issue in near future
Mainly a males’ problem, and a Mainly a males’ problem, and a urban phenomenon- rural urban phenomenon- rural prevalence tends to exceed prevalence tends to exceed urban by 2010urban by 2010
Male-Female gap closing up, Male-Female gap closing up, both rural and urbanboth rural and urban
403(2010) from 470 (2002)-403(2010) from 470 (2002)-ruralrural
414(2010) from 328 (2002)-414(2010) from 328 (2002)-urbanurban
Prevalence of Locomotor Disability
10741046
679
962901
597
784 804
1047
1345
1274
544
728 730
800
1170
828
1058
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1981 1991 2002
Year
No
. pe
r 10
0,0
00
po
pln
rural
urban
Female-rural
Males-rural
Females-urban
Males-urban
Males = 1440 (2010 rural) =1269 (2010 urban)
Females = 937 (2010 rural) = 855 (2010 urban)
Literacy Gap( 7yr +)Literacy Gap( 7yr +)
54
26
11
9
58
24
10
7
39
29
14
18
44
30
14
12
69
19
75
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
all persons rural urban males females
Per cent distribution of disabled persons of age 7 years and above by level of general education
not literate literate upto primaryliterate middle literate secondary & above
Literacy Gap( 7yr +)Literacy Gap( 7yr +)
Women with disabilities had 69% Women with disabilities had 69% illiterates ag. 44% illiterates among illiterates ag. 44% illiterates among men with disabilitiesmen with disabilities
Among the literates, 19% women Among the literates, 19% women with disabilities had education upto with disabilities had education upto primary level ag. 30% for disabled primary level ag. 30% for disabled menmen
Enrolment Gap ( 5-18 yr)Enrolment Gap ( 5-18 yr)
No. per No. per 1000 1000 disabledisabledd
In ordinary In ordinary schoolschool
In special In special schoolschool
RuralRural UrbanUrban RuraRurall
UrbanUrban
MaleMale 511511 461461 88 7979
FemalFemalee
420420 421421 44 145145
Enrolment Gap ( 5-18 yr)Enrolment Gap ( 5-18 yr)
51% boys (5-18 yrs) with disabilities in rural areas 51% boys (5-18 yrs) with disabilities in rural areas enroled in ordinary schools ag.42% girls with enroled in ordinary schools ag.42% girls with disabilitiesdisabilities
Situation in urban areas no better for girls and Situation in urban areas no better for girls and even worse for boyseven worse for boys
Special school is mainly an urban phenomenon Special school is mainly an urban phenomenon and serve the mentally disabled and the blindsand serve the mentally disabled and the blinds 8% disabled boys and 14% disabled girls were in special 8% disabled boys and 14% disabled girls were in special
schools in urban areas, of which about 2% each were schools in urban areas, of which about 2% each were mentally disabled boys and girlsmentally disabled boys and girls
In rural areas, enrolment in special schools for both boys In rural areas, enrolment in special schools for both boys and girls alike was negligible in absence of such facilitiesand girls alike was negligible in absence of such facilities
Enrolment Gap ( 5-18 yr)Enrolment Gap ( 5-18 yr)
Interestingly, children with movement Interestingly, children with movement disability and blindness had higher disability and blindness had higher enrolment in ordinary schools than in special enrolment in ordinary schools than in special schoolsschools
Blind girls however, had higher enrolment in Blind girls however, had higher enrolment in special schools than blind boys- very low special schools than blind boys- very low enrolment of blind girls in ordinary schoolsenrolment of blind girls in ordinary schools
Disability itself was reported as the main Disability itself was reported as the main reason for not attending any special schools reason for not attending any special schools for both boys (32.5%) and girls (30.8%) – for both boys (32.5%) and girls (30.8%) – this speaks of deficiencies and inadequacy of this speaks of deficiencies and inadequacy of special schooling methodsspecial schooling methods
Employment gap (15-59 yrs)Employment gap (15-59 yrs)
62% disabled men in rural areas and 62% disabled men in rural areas and 64% in urban areas were out of labour 64% in urban areas were out of labour force ag. 89% disabled women in rural force ag. 89% disabled women in rural areas and 91% in urban areasareas and 91% in urban areas
Among the employed with disabilities, Among the employed with disabilities, 36% were male and only 10% women – 36% were male and only 10% women – these proportions were slightly higher these proportions were slightly higher in rural areas than in urban areasin rural areas than in urban areas
Employment gap (15-59 yrs)Employment gap (15-59 yrs)
56
943
126
1
873
912
907
188
3
809
343
4
653
263
7
730
282
10
708
257
7
735
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
mental retardation
mental illness
blindness
low vision
hearing
speech
locomotor
all disa
bled
Per 1000 distribution of disabled persons by broad usual activity status for each type of disability
employed unemployed out of labour force
Employment GapEmployment Gap
In general, 55% disabled men and 60% of In general, 55% disabled men and 60% of disabled women were working in the disabled women were working in the primary sector- showing lobour imbalance primary sector- showing lobour imbalance against women with disabilitiesagainst women with disabilities
Lesser proportion of disabled women in Lesser proportion of disabled women in secondary (16%) and tertiary (22%) secondary (16%) and tertiary (22%) sectors as compared to disabled men’s sectors as compared to disabled men’s proportions of 17% and 28% respectivelyproportions of 17% and 28% respectively
In rural areas the proportion of disabled In rural areas the proportion of disabled men and disabled women in primary men and disabled women in primary sector is the same (70%)sector is the same (70%)
Family life (All ages)Family life (All ages)
Attitude towards the disabled is Attitude towards the disabled is reflected in how they lead family lifereflected in how they lead family lifeThey are not generally left alone – 3% They are not generally left alone – 3%
only found living alone ag. 92% living only found living alone ag. 92% living with spouse and/or, familywith spouse and/or, family45% of the disabled men were married, 47% 45% of the disabled men were married, 47%
never married and 8% widowed/ divorced / never married and 8% widowed/ divorced / separatedseparated
On the other hand, 31% of the disabled On the other hand, 31% of the disabled women were married, 39% never married women were married, 39% never married and 30% widowed/ divorced / separatedand 30% widowed/ divorced / separated
Family life (15 yr+)Family life (15 yr+)
28
50
32
47
33
57
22
39
29
49
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Rural Urban Male Female All persons
% distribution of disabled persons of ages 15 years and above by marital status
Never married Married Widowed Divorced/Separated n.r.
Family life (15 yr+)Family life (15 yr+)
29% of the disabled (15+) never 29% of the disabled (15+) never marriedmarried22% women22% women33% men33% men
49% of the disabled (15+) married49% of the disabled (15+) married39% women39% women57% men57% men
20% of the disabled (15+) widowed20% of the disabled (15+) widowed28% widows28% widows7% widowers7% widowers
Care/AssistanceCare/Assistance
61% disabled men and 59% disabled 61% disabled men and 59% disabled women can take self-care without women can take self-care without any aid/assistanceany aid/assistance
Critical section for social measures Critical section for social measures comprises 12% of disabled men and comprises 12% of disabled men and 15% of disabled women who can not 15% of disabled women who can not take care of themselves even with take care of themselves even with aid/assistanceaid/assistance
ConclusionConclusion
Degree to which State’s measures to Degree to which State’s measures to support participation of the disabled in the support participation of the disabled in the mainstream with rightful access to mainstream with rightful access to education, employment and personal education, employment and personal activities must take into account the gender activities must take into account the gender dimensions to make the interventions more dimensions to make the interventions more inclusive and addressing the issue of inclusive and addressing the issue of burden on the abler, particularly the able burden on the abler, particularly the able women in the households, who stay indoors women in the households, who stay indoors and do the care work unpaid for and do the care work unpaid for
ThanksThanks
top related