The Percentage of the US Population
Who Are People with Disabilities
David Pfeiffer
Center on Disability Studies
University of Hawaii at Manoa
Often when discussing the number/percentages of people with
disabilities in the US I am asked defend my use of the figure of 30%.
Here is my defense.
I have two citations. Regretfully neither of them are easily
available. THEREFORE, since the article citations themselves are
in the public domain and all of the rest of these comments are my
own, I hereby give the right of quotation and publication to
anyone interested PROVIDED that proper reference is given (that
they are my words). Something like: David Pfeiffer (2000)
personal communication or else cite it like an Internet message.
1. Barbara Altman. (1993) Definitions of disability and
their measurement and operationalization in survey data.
PROCEEDINGS OF THE 1993 PUBLIC HEALTH CONFERENCE ON RECORDS AND
STATISTICS: TOWARD THE YEAR 2000, REFINING THE MEASURES.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
National Center for Health Statistics, pages 219-24. Comments:
Using the 1987 National Medical Expenditure Survey (NMES) data,
Altman used five definitions of disability to study the sample:
(1) having a chronic condition; (2) having a functional
limitation; (3) unable to work; (4) over 30 days in a year in bed
because of a disability; and (5) receiving SSI, SSDI, or a
pension because of a disability. In the subsample of working age
people (18-64 years of age), after removing the overlap in
definition, she found that 44% are people with disabilities. It
is generally accepted that 20% of people under 18 are disabled
and as high as 50% of people over 64 are disabled. Including
these two groups and disregarding the people who refuse to
identify as a person with a disability, a figure of 30% of the
population being people with disabilities is quite defensible.
2. Charles S. Wilder. (1968) LIMITATION OF ACTIVITY AND
MOBILITY.... National Center for Health Statistics, Series 10,
Number 45, Washington, DC, US Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare. Comments: In the 1960s the Social Security
Administration realized that available disability statistics were
not reliable so they began to obtain their own using the National
Health Surveys which included all ages of the civilian
noninstitutionalized population.
Since it was carried out as a health survey, questions were
asked about chronic conditions, not a disability. This fact
probably accounts for more honest responses in the results.
Twenty seven chronic "conditions" could have been reported
including allergy, hemorrhoids, hay fever, and chronic skin
trouble, but also including tuberculosis, stroke, high blood
pressure, mental illness, heart trouble, and cancer. In addition
twelve "impairments" could have been reported including hearing,
vision, and speech impairment, missing extremity, palsy, and
paralysis of any kind. Notice that by not asking about the
existence of a disability the survey avoided the stigmatizing
label.
The results are reported in Table I in Wilder. It shows that
46% of the population reported having one or more of these
chronic conditions and/or impairments. In addition Table A in
Wilder gives the percentages of the population reporting one or
more of these chronic conditions and/or impairments from July
1957 to June 1966. They range from 41% to 49% with an arithmetic
mean of 44%.
It can be argued that many cases of hay fever, high blood
pressure, hemorrhoids, and allergy are not disabling. However,
some cases are clearly disabling. In addition, many persons
reporting one or more of these chronic conditions and/or
impairments will not identify as disabled. For these reasons,
disregard about one third of the respondents. Do NOT add in the
percentage of people who are mentally retarded or who have a
learning disability (both left out of the survey questionnaire),
and do not add in any percentages of persons who do not yet know
they have a disabling case of heart trouble or cancer or similar
problems. Leaving out this number, it can still be said that some
30% of the US population is disabled.
One reason that the higher number/percentage is not widely
accepted is that the courts (both state and federal) will only
accept disability statistics which come from the US Census.
However these numbers are too low. The 1970 and 1980 questions
were similar to the 1990 Census Questionnaire. In 1990 the Census
Bureau obtained data on people with disabilities using the
following questions.
Question 18: "Does this person [the respondent or a person
for whom the respondent is answering] have a physical, mental, or
other health condition that has lasted for 6 or more months and
which - a. Limits the kind or amount of work this person can do
at a job? [Answer Yes or No] b. Prevents this person from working
at a job? [Answer Yes or No]"
As a wheelchair user from polio at age nine and who has
worked for 38 years of my life, I would respond with "no" to both
parts of question 18. But, you say, be realistic because I could
never be a National League Football player. Well, neither could
most people. Everyone has some limitation in the kind or the
amount of work which she/he can do.
Question 19: "Because of a health condition that has lasted
for 6 or more months, does this person [the respondent or a
person for whom the respondent is answering] have any difficulty
- a. Going outside the home alone, for example, to shop or visit
a doctor's office? [Answer Yes or No] b. Taking care of his or
her own personal needs such as bathing, dressing, or getting
around inside the home? [Answer Yes or No]"
I would answer "no" to each of these parts of question 19.
But consider that almost everyone has difficulty going out of the
home (alone or not) during a blizzard or during mid-day in July
and August in many urban areas. And many people who live in two
or three story houses have some problem going up and down the
stairs. In other words, these questions, which are based upon
being able to carry out certain functions, are not adequate
questions to use to determine if a person is disabled or not.
In 1980 the Census Bureau asked about using public
transportation instead of Question 19. However, they realized
that most of the country does not have public transportation and
in those areas which do have it, many so-called non-disabled
persons have a very difficult time using it. So they changed it.
In the 2000 Census long form, Form D-2, there are two
questions with a total of six subparts regarding disability.
"16. Does this person have any of the following long-lasting
conditions: a. Blindness, deafness, or a severe vision or hearing
impairment? b. A condition that substantially limits one or more
basic physical activities such as walking, climbing stairs,
reaching, lifting, or carrying? [If a person has no problem with
sight or hearing and is fairly active, then this question does
not classify them as disabled.]"
"17. Because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition
lasting 6 months or more, does this person have any difficulty in
doing any of the following activities. a. Learning, remembering,
or concentrating? b. Dressing, bathing, or getting around inside
the home? c. (Answer if this person is 16 YEARS OLD OR OVER)
Going outside the home alone to shop or visit a doctor's office?
[Why mention a doctor's office?] d. (Answer if this person is 16
YEARS OLD OR OVER) Working at a job or business? [Again, a number
of people with disabilities who have no problem "getting around"
would be missed.]"
They made the same mistake and many persons with
disabilities will not be counted. The Census Bureau is aware of
the problems with their questions and, to their credit, tried to
come up with an adequate one. They have not succeeded, but they
have gradually raised the number of people who are disabled to
20%. So if you can not convince people with 30%, you can rely on
the Census Bureau's 20% even if this figure is too low.
August 1, 2000
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
David Pfeiffer, Ph.D.
Resident Scholar
Center on Disability Studies
University of Hawai`i at Manoa
[log in to unmask]
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Center on Disability Studies....maximizing individual
potential by encouraging independence, self-determination,
and full participation in the community.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
