How inclusive should the Paralympics be? The question is a complicated one for the event organisers, whose motto is to offer opportunities to athletes who cannot compete at the Olympics. In many ways, this year’s Games were a testament to the success of that mission. More countries than ever before competed in Paris, but a wide range of para-athletes and particular disabilities were absent. There was no place, for example, for blind golfers or amputee footballers, deaf sprinters or swimmers with organ transplants, as the Games treat each sport and disability differently. Could these athletes be seen in future competitions?
The definition of disability given at the Paralympic Games is narrow, certainly narrower than that used by the United Nations or in British or American law. To be eligible to compete, athletes must have one of ten specific “disabilities” defined by the International Paralympic Committee (IPC). The list identifies eight biomechanical disabilities, such as limb deficiencies, short stature or damage to the nervous system, as well as visual and intellectual disabilities.
There are two main ways in which the framework excludes certain disabled athletes. Firstly, athletics and swimming are the only sports that offer medals in all ten classifications. In contrast, Paralympic football, for example, is open only to visually impaired men, even though there are world championships for visually impaired women, as well as for players with amputations, cerebral palsy and electric wheelchairs.
Secondly, even if every Paralympic event included all IPC classifications, the games would still exclude large numbers of athletes with disabilities. Groups conspicuous by their absence include deaf athletes, organ transplant recipients and (most) athletes with intellectual disabilities.
Part of this is due to the groups’ own wishes. The world body representing deaf athletes, for example, does not consider deafness a disability, but rather an inherent demographic characteristic, like skin colour or sexuality, that does not affect physical performance. As a result, many deaf athletes choose to compete in an event separate from the Paralympic Games: the Deaflympics. There are also multi-sport events specifically for transplant recipients (the World Transplant Games) and for people with intellectual disabilities (both the Special Olympics World Games and the Virtus Global Games). Both groups are excluded, in whole or in part, from the Paralympic Games qualification system.
The intellectual impairment system can be especially frustrating for some athletes. Those with Down syndrome, for example, technically qualify for the Paralympics but rarely participate. The additional physical disabilities that often accompany Down syndrome, such as shorter stature, hypotonia (decreased muscle tone), and delayed development of motor skills, make it difficult for these athletes to compete in finals against athletes with intellectual disabilities and fewer physical disabilities.
Games for everyone?
Here, then, is the great puzzle of the Paralympics. Can the Games be expanded to include new categories for more disabled athletes? After all, Paris hosted twice as many Olympians as Paralympians this summer. In fact, the 10,500 Olympians who competed in France outnumber all the athletes who competed in the current Paralympics and in the more recent Deaflympics, World Transplant Games and Virtus Global Games.
But staging an expanded Paralympic Games does not just mean managing more athletes. It would also increase the number of events, and all in a limited range of venues. The necessary funds may not be available, given that the Olympics attract more fans, as well as more money from governments, media companies and sponsors. Competitions such as the Deaf Paralympics and Special Olympics could perhaps be held, like the Paralympics, as part of a longer Olympic summer. But it is not clear whether host cities and viewing publics would be willing to hold more multi-sport events in a season.
Ultimately, the best way to make the Paralympics more inclusive, at least in the short term, is through a system of small improvements tailored to specific sports and the needs and interests of people with particular disabilities. This could mean including women with vision problems in football competitions or adding races for people with Down syndrome to swimming competitions. Funding concerns may prevent the games from expanding quickly, but the Paralympics have a history of increasing fan interest with each edition. Television coverage in Paris was the most extensive in history. A slight broadening of the range of athletes now should attract even more fans in the future.
© 2024, The Economist Newspaper Limited. All rights reserved. From The Economist, published under license. The original content can be found at www.economist.com
Disclaimer:
The information contained in this post is for general information purposes only. We make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability with respect to the website or the information, products, services, or related graphics contained on the post for any purpose.
We respect the intellectual property rights of content creators. If you are the owner of any material featured on our website and have concerns about its use, please contact us. We are committed to addressing any copyright issues promptly and will remove any material within 2 days of receiving a request from the rightful owner.