Human Rights and Disability A Manual for National Human Rights Institutions It is also important to note that “the population with impairments is not static and people move in and out of this group over time”44 This suggests that a great majority of citizens will, at some point in their lives, experience disability, either directly or indirectly. NHRIs working on disability issues should be sensitive to the ‘floating’ nature of much of the population. Indeed, the increasing focus of NHRIs on ‘intersectionality’ – that is, multiple and overlapping identities – will itself have to be attuned to disability issues. 1.5. INTERSECTIONALITY: THE NEED TO FRAME DISABILITY ALONGSIDE OTHER IDENTITIES Not everyone is affected equally by the various challenges and barriers that can arise in relation to disability. The 2011 World Report on Disability noted that: … while disability correlates with disadvantage, not all persons with disabilities are equally disadvantaged. Women with disabilities experience the combined disadvantages of gender as well as disability …. People who experience mental health conditions or intellectual impairments appear to be more disadvantaged in many settings than those who experience physical or sensory impairments.45 Overlapping or multiple discrimination on several or combined grounds – for example, age and disability – magnifies the impact on the person. In other words, having multiple identities can bring with it multiple disadvantages that might – separately – be associated with those identities. The UN CRPD takes a major step forward by expressly covering this ‘intersectional’ discrimination.46 This is important because our identities are never fully contained by one characteristic but include a number of intersecting identities, such as disability, gender, age, race and religion. It is also important because such overlapping identities can compound the discrimination experienced by some groups.47 The Convention explicitly covers intersectionality with respect to women with disabilities (article 6) and children with disabilities (article 7). 1.6. BROADENING PROTECTION TO OTHERS WHO DO NOT HAVE A DISABILITY Discriminatory behaviour on the ground of disability is not only experienced by persons with disabilities. It is important to emphasise that the prohibition of discrimination “on the basis of disability” (article 5(2) of the UN CRPD) may cover those who are not themselves disabled, as understood under the broad definition in article 1. However, they may experience discrimination because of their relationship to someone who is disabled. This is known as ‘associative discrimination’. It is important because the ripple effects of discrimination can be felt by carers, family members and others with whom persons with disabilities share their lives. For example, associative discrimination can profoundly affect mothers of children with disabilities who may find it difficult, if not impossible, to enter, stay in or re-enter the workforce. Furthermore, the high opportunity costs associated with caring may mean that a carer is penalised later on in life by not having had the opportunity to grow a pension, thereby exposing them to poverty in old age. Associative discrimination has been held by many courts to be implicitly protected by anti-discrimination law.48 Furthermore, some anti-discrimination laws protect people who do not have a disability but who 18 44 United Kingdom Department for Work and Pensions, Fulfilling Potential: Building a Deeper Understanding of Disability in the UK Today, 2013, p. 22; available at www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/320509/buildingunderstanding-main-report.pdf. 45 World Health Organization; p. 8; available at www.refworld.org/docid/50854a322.html. 46 See preambular para. (p). 47 The intersection between disability and other grounds of discrimination is addressed in detail in Equal Rights Review, Vol. 16, 2016; available at www.equalrightstrust.org/equal-rights-review-volume-sixteen-2016. 48 See, for example, Case C-303/06 Coleman v. Attridge Law & Steve Law (2008) ECJ in which the European Court of Justice determined a mother of a disabled person was protected under the provisions of Directive 2000/78.