Skip to main content

Paralympic Sport and Social Justice: Towards a Happy Marriage or Difficult Separation?

Abstract

Over the last 25 years, the International Paralympic Committee (IPC) and its network of national affiliates have placed integration of disabled people firmly on the sporting agenda, a process widely regarded as a positive step. Access to high-performance sporting provision is, however, problematic for two reasons. Firstly, the nature of high-performance sport is such that some people will always be excluded due to a lack of ability and secondly, the vast number of athletes with a potential to be Paralympians and therefore part of Paralympic programmes are not individuals who are denied access to sporting provision. In terms of increasing access for vulnerable people in the Global South to physical exercise, inclusion and healthy lifestyles, Paralaympic programmes do not fulfil the requirements of a social justice agenda.

Keywords

  • International Paralympic Committee (IPC)
  • Sports Provision
  • High Performance Sport
  • Paralympic Movement
  • Paralympic Games

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-74675-3_14
  • Chapter length: 13 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   229.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-319-74675-3
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Hardcover Book
USD   299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)

Notes

  1. 1.

    T54 is an event classification. The “T” says that this is a track event. The “5” says that it is an event for a wheelchair athlete and the “4” means that the athlete is a highly mobile user of a wheelchair.

References

  • Bowen, J. (2002). The Americans with Disabilities Act and its application to sport. Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 29, 66–74.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Christie, J. (2004, December 11). “Spirit in motion”: Paralympians rise. The Globe and Mail.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, B. A. (2005). Good faith and effort? Perspectives on educational inclusion. Disability & Society, 20, 331–344.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Coubertin, P. de. (1956/1935). The fundamentals of the philosophy of the modern Olympics. Bulletin de Comité International Olympique, 56, 52–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deal, M. (2007). Aversive disablism: Subtle prejudice toward disabled people. Disability & Society, 22(1), 93–107.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Donnelly, J. (1985). The concept of human rights. London: Croom Helm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, M. (2002). Human rights: An interdisciplinary approach. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, J. L., & Norman, G. C. (2009). The Paralympics: Yet another missed opportunity for social integration. Boston University International Law Review, 27(2), 345–366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, S. (1986). Spirit of Stoke Mandeville: The story of Ludwig Guttmann. London: Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guttman, L. (1976). Textbook of sport for the disabled. Aylesbury: HM&M.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, J. (1985). The value of life: An introduction to medical ethics. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoberman, J. (1995). Toward a theory of Olympic internationalism. Journal of Sports History, 22(1), 1–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howe, P. D. (2008). The cultural politics of the Paralympic movement: Through the anthropological lens. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howe, P. D. (2010). Disability, Olympism and Paralympism. In A. Bairner & G. Molnar (Eds.), Politics of the Olympics (pp. 69–80). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howe, P. D. (2011). Cyborg and supercrip: The Paralympics technology and the (dis)empowerment of disabled athletes. Sociology, 45(5), 868–882.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howe, P. D. (2012). Children of a lesser God: Paralympics and high-performance sport. In J. Sugden & A. Tomlinson (Eds.), Watching the Olympics: Politics, power and representation (pp. 165–181). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Olympic Committee (IOC). (2004). Olympic charter. Retrieved from http://www.joc.or.jp/olympism/charter/pdf/olympiccharter2004.pdf. Accessed 29 Apr 2017.

  • International Olympic Committee (IOC). (2017). Social development through sport. Retrieved from https://www.olympic.org/development-through-sport. Accessed 29 Apr 2017.

  • International Paralympic Committee (IPC). (2017). The IPC – Who we are. Retrieved from https://www.paralympic.org/the-ipc/about-us. Accessed 29 Apr 2017.

  • Jones, C., & Howe, P. D. (2005). The conceptual boundaries of sport for the disabled: Classification and athletic performance. Journal of Philosophy of Sport, 32, 133–146.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Labanowich, S. (1988). A case for the integration of the disabled into the Olympic Games. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 5, 263–272.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Landry, F. (1995). Paralympic games and social integration. In M. De Moragas Spả & M. Botella (Eds.), The key of success: The social, sporting, economic and communications impact of Barcelona ’92 (pp. 1–17). Bellaterra: Servei de Publicacions de la Universitat Autỏnoma de Barcelona.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenskyj, H. (2008). Olympic industry resistance: Challenging Olympic power and propaganda. Albany: SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, J. (1689/1970). Two treaties of government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacIntyre, A. (1999). Dependent rational animals: Why human beings need the virtues. Chicago: Open Court.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malhotra, R. (2008). Expanding the frontiers of justice: Reflections on the theory of capabilities, disability rights, and the politics of global equality. Socialism and Democracy, 22(1), 83–100.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Northway, R. (1997). Integration and inclusion: Illusion or progress in services in services for disabled people. Social Policy and Administration, 31(2), 157–172.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. C. (2006). Frontiers of justice: Disability, nationality, species membership. London: Belknap Harvard.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, M. (1990). The politics of disablement. London: Macmillan.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, M. (1996). Understanding disability: From theory to practice. Basingstoke: Macmillian.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, M., & Barnes, C. (1998). Social policy and disabled people: From exclusion to inclusion. London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Purdue, D. E. J., & Howe, P. D. (2012). See the sport, not the disability? – Exploring the Paralympic paradox. Qualitative Research in Sport and Exercise, 4(2), 189–205.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. (1971). The theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seymour, W. (1998). Remaking the body: Rehabilitation and change. London: Routledge.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Silva, C. F., & Howe, P. D. (2012). Difference, adapted physical activity and human development: Potential contribution of capabilities approach. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 29(1), 25–43.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Stammer, N. (1999). Social movements the social construction of human rights. Human Rights Quarterly, 21(4), 980–1008.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Steadward, R. (1996). Integration and sport in the Paralympic movement. Sport Science Review, 5, 26–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations. (1948). Universal declaration of human rights. Retrieved from http://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Documents/UDHR_Translations/eng.pdf. Accessed 29 Apr 2017.

  • United Nations. (1993). Vienna declaration and programme of action. Retrieved from http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/Vienna.aspx. Accessed 29 Apr 2017.

  • United Nations. (2006). Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/disabilities/documents/convention/convoptprot-e.pdf. Accessed 29 Apr 2017.

  • United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (1978). International charter of physical education and sport. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/education/nfsunesco/pdf/SPORT_E.PDF. Accessed 29 Apr 2017.

  • Vanlandewijck, Y. C., & Chappel, R. J. (1996). Integration and classification issues in competitive sports for athletes with disabilities. Sport Science Review, 5, 65–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolff, E. A., Torres, C., & Hums, M. A. (2008). Olympism and the Olympic athlete with a disability. In O. Schantz & K. Gilbert (Eds.), The Paralympics: Elite sport or freak show (pp. 167–175). Aachen: Meyer & Meyer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zola, I. K. (1989). Towards the necessary universalizing of disability policy. The Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly, 67(Supplement 2), 401–428.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. David Howe .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

David Howe, P. (2019). Paralympic Sport and Social Justice: Towards a Happy Marriage or Difficult Separation?. In: Watermeyer, B., McKenzie, J., Swartz, L. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Disability and Citizenship in the Global South. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74675-3_14

Download citation