Daily Summary related to Draft Article 5
PROMOTION OF POSITIVE ATTITUDES TO PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
Prepared by Landmine Survivors Network

Volume 3, #7
January 13, 2004

Afternoon Session
Commenced: 3.17 pm
Adjourned: 6.00 pm

THE ROLE OF THE MEDIA

Text of the new proposed article on the “Elimination of Stereotypes and Prejudices,” was introduced by Mexico. Mexico had recognized the need for a more detailed provision on increased awareness and the role of other actors with respect to non-discrimination. This article obligates States Parties to adopt “immediate and effective measures” (reflecting language taken from CERD and CEDAW) to implement 3 objectives: 1. to create awareness throughout society regarding disability and PWD; 2. to combat stereotypes and prejudices against PWD; 3. to promote an image of PWD as full and capable members of society sharing the same rights and freedoms in a manner consistent with the purposes of the Convention. The measures include: (a). public awareness campaigning; (b). increasing awareness of children; (c). increasing the participation of PWD.

Ireland highlighted the intention behind the 3rd objective, as going beyond a vague commitment to “positive images” and get specific as to what these images might be. As regards measures, sensitizing children at early age is crucial, as attitudes learned by children are pursued well into adult life. Lastly, the use of the word “encourage” with respect to the media takes into account that states are limited in what they can ask the media to do. States should certainly “encourage” the media to follow through on their demands, but states cannot create obligations of the media in this respect.

Inclusion International (II) explored the question of who can change society, and stressed that it is PWD themselves who will change society by saying ‘you do not treat people the way you did before.’ II underlined that too often in past, it has been the non-disabled world that has tried to change “our perspective.”

WFDB indicated that the article seemed appropriate, but requested time later in the WG to discuss it. Particularly the 9 blind people in the WG should have an opportunity to read it.

The Coordinator deemed this article consistent with the sentiment in the room and proposed to re-issue it as a revised document.

IID noted that in provision (b) of the proposed text IID preferred the wording “to generate awareness” instead of “sensitizing.”

Ireland and Mexico underlined their fruitful collaboration. In addition, Mexico noted valuable contributions, with respect to language in the article, from Landmine Survivors Network and Rehabilitation International.

Volume 3, #8
January 14, 2004

Afternoon Session
Commenced: 3:14
Adjourned: 6:08

ELIMINATION OF STEREOTYPES AND PREJUDICES

WFB asserted that the portrayal of PWD in the media should be included in the awareness campaign section of this article. PWD are either portrayed as victims or heroes, not simply as normal people. It is important to educate the public, through the media, about the lives, skills and contributions to society made by PWD.

China suggested that where the article addresses public awareness campaigns, there might be a list of ideas for carrying out activities, such as establishing a national disability day. The delegate also suggested making explicit reference to sports activities.

The Republic of Korea suggested changing the title. “Elimination of Stereotypes and Prejudices” takes a negative approach to the issue. “Promotion of Public Awareness” is a more positive angle.

Thailand drew attention to the reference to promoting an image of PWD as “full and capable members of society.” The delegate suggested substituting “productive” in place of “full.” In addition, the word “capable” should probably come first so that it reads “capable and productive members of society.” Thailand also pointed to the language “to foster an attitude of respect for the rights of PWD” and proposed that the word “positive” be inserted before “attitude.”

The Asia-Pacific Disability Forum took issue with Thailand’s suggestion to use the word “productive.” It is important to recognize that rights are universal. If rights are linked to productive value, this would distinguish between certain groups of people who are productive and others who are not, thus undermining the rights of a certain group. The WNUSP suggested that “contributing” might be a better way of phrasing it.

Back to Draft Article