Past Approaches to Identifying People with Disabilities

A common method for identifying people with disabilities via censuses and surveys is to ask the following yes/no screening question: Do you have a disability? Data from censuses and surveys that use this question produces very low rates of disability prevalence.[1]

This is because the term “disability” is often stigmatized and people do not wish to identify themselves or others in their households as having a “disability.” Second, people often think disability refers only to the most serious limitations. Therefore, those with mild or moderate disabilities will often respond in the negative. Third, functioning is related to age and, therefore, older people may not report a disability, believing it is a natural result of the ageing process. 

For these reasons, people with disabilities can be missed. Generally, best practice would be not to use the term “disability” when attempting to identify people with disabilities.

Listing diagnoses such as epilepsy, leprosy, paralysis and cerebral palsy, among others, to detect respondents’ disabilities can also lead to underreporting, since the list will be incomplete. Furthermore, this approach is bias, since those who had or have better access to education and health care are likely to have more knowledge about their diagnosis. Moreover, a diagnosis does not reveal much about a person’s ability to function. For example, some people with cerebral palsy can speak with little or no problem, while others cannot speak at all.

Instead, the recommended approach for identifying persons with disabilities in quantitative data instruments is to focus on the level of difficulty that people have in undertaking various activities, such as walking or climbing stairs or communicating. Regardless of the impairment, or the person’s self-perception as to whether they have a “disability,” the key is to identify persons who have difficulties with core and basic activities.