1

INTRODUCTION
This chapter shall allow you to look at Special Needs and Inclusive Education
from historical and philosophical contexts. The first step to becoming an effective
Special Needs and/or Inclusive teacher lies not in one's skill to teach strategically, but in
one's willingness and commitment to respect individual differences. As seen in the
previous chapter, diversity is a natural part of every environment and must be perceived
as a given rather than an exception.
Defining inclusion has proven difficult for scholars in the field of inclusive
education. It is frequently characterized as a process rather than a location or as a
journey rather than a destination. The phrase "overcome barriers" alludes directly to the
social model of disability, which views disability as the result of interactions between an
individual with a disability and the environmental, social, and political obstacles that
prevent them from participating and gaining access. The process of integrating people
with disabilities into mainstream educational institutions, provided that they are able to
adapt to the standardized requirements of those institutions, is known as integration.
Different countries have different histories of inclusive education (Graham, 2020).
Everyone has a right to education. Having a disability should not be an excuse
for being deprived access to schools; neither should poverty, religion, nor race. Inclusive
education is an inevitable direction to take and must be properly understood,
appreciated, and prepared for within the context of society being accepting of individual
differences. for a nation to be truly inclusive, one must start from a humane perspective
of disability and a transformative mindset on inclusion. Thus, the success of inclusive
education starts with an appreciation and acceptance of diversity, reinforced by a
supportive and genuinely inclusive mind-set among our general education teachers.

I. MODELS OF DISABILITY
The concept of disability has been existent for ages. The Bible chronicles the
presence of persons who are blind and crippled who needed to be healed. Cultural
narratives like "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" and "Kampanerang Kuba" depict
disability as a source of fear and ridicule. Even Philippine history has records of
disability through the Apolinario Mabini, who was unable to walk because of a physically
impairing condition called poliomyelitis. Clearly, disability cuts across countries, cultures,
and timelines. But perhaps it is part of human nature to react negatively to anything
perceived as different or out of the ordinary. There is often resistance, especially when
people are met with situations that they are unfamiliar with. Persons with disabilities
(PWDs) are not exempted from this type of treatment.
How PWDs were once treated is not something any nation would be proud of.
Historically, people formed opinions and reactions toward disability in a similar pattern. It
was consistent for almost every country: society first took notice of those with physical
disabilities because they immediately stood out, then they noticed those with less
 2

apparent developmental conditions because they acted differently. As soon as the

"deviants" were "identified," segregation, exclusion, isolation, and other forms of
violence and cruelty followed. Prior to the Age of Enlightenment in the 1700s, these
were common practices highly accepted by society. Such practices, which are now
considered discriminatory and violating of human rights, were evident in all aspects of
community: living spaces, health care, education, and work.
For instance, there was a time when the status of PWDs was in question. In
earlier times, PWDs were seen as social threats capable of contaminating an otherwise
pure human species (Kisanji 1999). Therefore, as much as communities needed to be
protected from them, PWDs also had to be protected from society. Some people saw
them as menaces, while others treated them as objects of dread, pity, entertainment, or
ridicule. At best, they were put on a pedestal and perceived as Holy Innocents or eternal
children who could do no wrong (Wolfensberger 1972). At worst, they were killed or
treated as subhumans devoid of any rights (Kisanji 1999, Wolfensberger 1972).
Sociology reminds us that human behavior must always be studied in relation to
cultural, historical, and socio-structural contexts. In fact, the best way to understand why
people think or act the way they do is by looking at what was happening to their
community at a certain point in time. Events tend to shape one's beliefs and values
system. As such, it is important that we examine historical highlights to appreciate man's
perspectives on disability (see Figure 2.1).

Moral / Religious Functional /

Model Rehabilitation model
[Medieval Times / [Medieval Times /
Age of Discovery] Age of Discovery]

1500s - 1600s 1970s onwards

5th to 8th Century Early1900s -1970s

[Copernican / [Post-Modern Times]

Scientific Revolution] Social Model Rights-
Biomedical Model Based Model Twin-
Track Approach

Figure 2.1. The evolution of models of Disability

Smart's study in 2004 (as cited in Retief and Letsosa, 2018) emphasizes that
models of disability are important as they serve several purposes: (1) they provide
definitions of disability, (2) they offer "explanations of causal and responsibility
 3

attributions", (3) they are based on "perceived needs," (4) they inform policy, (5) they
are not "value-neutral," (6) they define the academic disciplines that focus on disability,
(7) they "shape the self-identity of PWDs," and (8) they can provide insight on how
prejudices and discriminations occur. This last statement, in particular, has proven to be
very powerful in helping us see how, to a certain extent, society is unconsciously led to
respond to disability.

A. The Moral/Religious Model

The Medieval age is said to have started from AD 476, the year the Western
Roman Empire fell, and ended toward the early 1800s, eventually ushering in the
Renaissance age and Age of Discovery. This period saw the Church as one of the most
influential figures in Europe. The idea of God as an all-powerful being was so strong in
man's consciousness that it affected the way society treated PWDs at the time. Parents
who bore children with disabilities were seen from within a spectrum where on one end,
God was punishing them for a sin that needed to be atoned, and at the other extreme,
He was blessing the family by giving them a precious gift that only they could care for.
The middle ground was to see disability as a test of faith and an opportunity to redeem
oneself through endurance, resilience, and piety (Niemann 2005 as cited in Retief and
Letsosa 2018).
Such perspectives are rooted in a moral or religious model of disability, which
sees disability as either a blessing or a curse. It is characterized by notions of charity
and caretaking. However, Jackson (2018) adds that protection is also a primary concern
as there is an instinct to protect both persons with disabilities for their vulnerability and
the economic and social order which might be disrupted by "deviant members" of
society. It is considered the oldest model of disability and is evident in many religious
traditions. For instance, biblical scripture would refer to persons with chronic illnesses
like leprosy as unclean, while those considered demonically possessed may actually
have had mental illnesses (McClure 2007 as cited in Retief and Letsosa 2018) or
seizure disorders. In one strand of the moral/ religious model, disability is equated with
the sin, evilness, or spiritual ineptness of either the PWD or of a PWD's family member.
Such a belief can then cause not just the PWD's isolation but also the exclusion of the
entire family unit from communal events (Rimmerman 2013 as cited in Retief and
Letsosa 2018). On the other hand, for those who view disability as a blessing, •
disability either becomes one's ticket to heaven or an opportunity toward character
development.
In addition, some cultures who ascribe to a moral/religious model of disability
may also lean toward a type of mystical narrative. Their belief is that disabilities may
impair some senses yet heighten others, thereby "granting him or her 'special abilities to
perceive, reflect, transcend, be spiritual'" (Olkin 1999 as cited in Retief and Letsosa
2018).
For the most part, the core response to this model was the establishing of
segregated institutions where PWDs could be kept. In the United States, United
Kingdom, and Australia, asylums for the "mentally ill, retardates, degenerates, and
 4

defectives" were built (Jackson 2018). Segregated residential schools and workhouses
with dormitories located miles away from town centers were also erected.
Although the moral/religious model is not as dominant now as it used to be
during the Medieval times, the perspective is still reflected in some places where
religion plays a huge influence on daily life.

B. The Biomedical/Individual Model

Historians and scientists alike consider the Copernican Revolution, that is, the
discovery of Nicolaus Copernicus that the center of the universe was the sun and not
the Earth, is one of the most controversial yet significant discoveries of all time. It was
revolutionary and bold because it dared to contradict the Bible as well as then-
considered fundamental truths. But it was a breakthrough that triggered major changes
in the fields of science, philosophy, theology, and education. Most evident was its
contribution to scientific and technological advancements. What was not as apparent
was how it paved the way for people to also shift mind-sets from a religious perspective
to a more evidence-based model of disability called the biomedical (medical) model:
Here, PWDs are seen as persons who are ill and meant to be treated or "made more
normal." Olkin (1999 as cited in Retief & Letsosa 2018: 2-3) wrote:
"Disability is seen as a medical problem that resides in the individual. It is a
defect in or failure of a bodily system and as such, is inherently abnormal and
pathological. The goals of intervention are cure, amelioration of the physical condition to
the greatest extent possible, and rehabilitation (i.e., the adjustment of the person with
the disability to the condition and to the environment). Persons with disabilities are
expected to avail themselves of the variety of services offered to them and to spend
time in the role of patient or learner being helped by trained professionals* (p. 26).
Whereas a moral/religious perspective sees disability as something permanent,
the biomedical (medical) model considers disability as a "glitch" the PWD is born into,
which needs assessment and fixing. While Oliver (1990) refers to the model as the
individual model, Nankervis, 2006 as cited in Jackson, 2018, p.3 describes it to be a
normative model based on a person's levels of deficiency "compared to a normative
state" (Jackson 2018). Such a perspective pushes forth the idea that PWDs have
problems. It also reinforces the notion that those "without disabilities" (i.e., the able-
bodied or typically developing) are superior than those with disabilities, and that they
have a primary responsibility over the welfare of the disabled. Most interventions are
thus devoted to making sure that the PWD catches up with his or her peers a practice
that is very much ingrained in society to this day (see Figure 2.2).
 5

Figure 2.2. The Medical Model of Disability.

It was during the 15th century when more schools for PWDs started to emerge in
Europe. These first special schools were built by private philanthropic institutions.
Although they initially catered only to those with sensory impairments such as deafness
and blindness, other schools soon started accepting other disability types into their
student roster. Interestingly, the curriculum for such educational institutions was different
from that of public schools (Kisanji 1999). In special schools, the main focus was on
building the vocational skills of students a clear sign that the biomedical model sees
PWDs as different from the majority. The idea of institutionalizing or bringing PWDs to
asylums or hospitals for custodial care when they have become too difficult to manage
also reached its peak with the reinforcement of the biomedical model (Jackson, 2018;
Pritchard, 1960 and Bender, 1970 as cited in Kisanji, 1999).
C. The Functional/Rehabilitation Model
The scientific breakthroughs experienced from the time of Copernicus up until the
early 1900s brought about changes in all aspects of life, including warfare and the
concept of power. When World War I happened, communities witnessed perfectly
healthy people leave to serve the country only to come back disabled physically,
neurologically, or mentally. It was then that people started to realize that not all
disabilities are inborn. Physical and Occupational Therapies soon became prevalent
 6

modes of rehabilitation for much of the service-related injuries the soldiers sustained
(Shalk & Shemjaz 2014) (National Rehabilitation Information Center, 2018).
The functional/rehabilitation model is quite similar to the biomedical model in that
it sees the PWD as having deficits. These deficits then justify the need to undergo
rehabilitative intervention such as therapies, counseling, and the like in the aim of
reintegrating the disabled into society. The main difference between the two models is in
the concept of habilitation and rehabilitation.
The biomedical model often suggests habilitation, which refers to help given to
those whose disabilities are congenital or manifested very early in life in order to
maximize function. On the other hand, the functional/rehabilitation model refers to the
assistance given by professionals to those who have an acquired disability in the hope
of gaining back one's functionality.
The biomedical and rehabilitative models, together with the dawn of clinic-based
assessments in the 1950s and its proliferation during the 1960s onward, show how
much society has placed value on convention, performance, and achievement. Anyone
whose performance does not fall within the norm of a population is automatically
deemed different and deficient. In living spaces, such persons were shunned by society.
In educational settings, such students were advised to transfer schools for a more
specialized type of education (Clough in Clough & Corbett 2000). In workplaces, they
were segregated or refused opportunities. Either way, both models constantly put the
PWD at a disadvantage. They become easy targets for pity or recipients of charitable
work. Moreover, both promote an expert-client type of relationship between the "non-
disabled" and the "disabled," where the PWD is automatically perceived as inferior. At
the very least, this relational exchange benefits the client as the expert can help
improve his or her state. However, at the extreme, this collaboration "undermines the
client's dignity by removing the ability to participate in the simplest, everyday decisions
affecting his or her life" (Jean 2012).
D. The Social Model
What we need to understand about models and frameworks is that they have a
strong yet subtle way of influencing a person's beliefs, behaviors, and values systems.
For example, a Filipino born and raised in the United States who comes to the
Philippines would most likely act more American than Filipino, not because he resists
his roots but because of his exposure to Americans, not Filipinos. He may not have
been raised this way intentionally but constant interaction with others of a particular
culture can strongly influence a person's way of life. (Clough & Corbett 2000) points out
that the social (sociological) model became society's reaction to how the biomedical
perspective viewed disability. In fact, Mike Oliver, a lecturer in the 1980s who coined the
term "social model" and is considered one of its main proponents, wrote a position
paper directly reacting against how the medical field has been reinforcing a disabling
view of PWDs. According to the sociological response, disability occurs as a result of
society's lack of understanding of individual differences. PWDs are seen as disabled not
because they are deficient but because society "insists" they are deficient and
disadvantaged. Norms, after all, are determined by society. Professor David Pfeiffer
challenges the concept of norms:
 7

"It depends upon the concept of normal. That is, being a person with a disability
which limits my mobility means that I do not move about in a (so-called) normal way. But
what is the normal way to cover a mile...? Some people would walk. Some people
would ride a bicycle or a bus or in a taxi or their own car. Others would use a
skateboard or in line roller blades. Some people use wheelchairs. There is, I argue, no
normal way to travel a mile." (Kaplan 2000: 355).
The underlying principle of the social model of disability is that disability is a
social construct, where standards and limitations that society places on specific groups
of people are what disable a person. With this perspective, everything from government
laws to education to employment opportunities to access to communal facilities take on
a different meaning. For instance, Mara, a person with paraplegia (a condition that
causes impaired functioning of the legs) who uses a motorized wheelchair, should be
able to go around on her own. The mayor in her town put up an elevator by the foot
bridge to help people get to the top easily without having to climb up the stairs. Although
there are facilities in the foot bridge to get her from one side of the highway to the other,
she wonders how she could get to the foot bridge from her house. Public transportation,
unfortunately, is not accessible from her home. And even if it were, none of the
transports would be able to take a wheelchair. Jana, on the other hand, also has
paraplegia but lives in a neighboring town as Mara's, where the local government
provides shuttles for those with physical disabilities. She has a wheelchair herself,
though it is not motorized. Despite this, Jana is able to go around by herself because
her town provides continuous access from one point to the next. This example shows
that what is truly disabling is not the physical condition the way the medical model would
adhere to, but the lack of opportunities and restrictions given to a person, as the social
model would push for (see Figure 2.3)
 8

Figure 2.3. The Social Model of Disability.

The World Health Organization (1980) differentiates between disability and
impairment. Impairment is seen as "any loss or abnormality of psychological or
anatomical structure or function" while disability refers to "any restriction or lack
(resulting from an impairment) of ability to perform an activity in the manner or within the
range considered normal for a human being". Most people seem to confuse the two
terms, most of the time equating them to each other. The social model, however,
reiterates that impairment should be seen as a normal aspect of life and when it
happens, it should not cause a stir. Instead, society must plan in anticipation of possible
impairment occurrences so as not to disable anyone. Kaplan (2000) agrees that if
disability were to be seen as something natural and expected, it could change the way
we design our systems and our environments. Wendell (1996 as cited in Kaplan 2000:
356) relates:
"The cultural habit of regarding the condition of the person, not the built
environment or the social organization of activities, as the source of the problem, runs
deep. For example, it took me several years of struggling with the heavy door to my
building, sometimes having to wait until a person stronger came along, to realize that
the door was an accessibility problem, not only for me, but for others as well. And I did
not notice, until one of my students pointed it out, that the lack of signs that could be
read from a distance at my university forced people with mobility impairments to expend
a lot of energy unnecessarily, searching for rooms and offices. Although I have
encountered this difficulty myself on days when walking was exhausting to me, I
interpreted it, automatically, as a problem arising from my illness (as I did with the door),
rather than as a problem arising from the built environment having been created for too
narrow a range of people and situations."

E. Rights-Based Model and Twin Track Approach

The rights-based model of disability is a framework that bears similarities with the
social model. Although most practitioners see the two as one and the same, Degener
(2017 in Retief & Letsosa 2018) argues their nuances. While the social model reiterates
social factors and dynamics that form our perceptions of disability, the rights-based
model "moves beyond explanation, offering a theoretical framework for disability policy
that emphasizes the human dignity of PWDs" (Degener 2017:43). It immediately
recognizes the PWDs' vulnerability and tries to address this by upholding and
safeguarding their identities and rights as human beings. Moreover, while "the social
model is mostly critical of public health policies that advocate the prevention of
impairment, the human rights model recognizes the fact that properly formulated
prevention policy may be regarded as an instance of human rights protection for PWDs
(Degener 2017:52).
A rights-based approach to education ensures that all energies are devoted to
the realization of each learner's right to education. It is built on the principle that
education is a basic human right and therefore all must have access to it. There are four
key actors directly involved in such a model: (1) the government as duty-bearers, (2) the
 9

child as the rights-holder, (3) the parents not only as duty-bearers but also as
representatives of the child, and (4) the teachers, both as rights-holders and duty-
bearers (Van den Brule-Balescut & Sandkull 2005).
At best, lobbyists and practitioners now promote a twin track approach, which
combines the social model and the rights-based model. A marrying of the two
perspectives allows for holistic changes to occur, with the option of promoting individual
needs whenever necessary. For instance, in education, this would mean allowing a
PWD to join the mainstream, yet be given opportunities for disability-specific programs
in case additional support is needed (Chassy & Josa 2018).
II. WHAT IS SPECIAL NEEDS EDUCATION?
Merriam-Webster Online (n.d.) defines education as "the action or process of
teaching someone especially in a school, college or university". People typically go
through this teaching-learning process following a particular sequence. First, they are
educated at home by their parents; then they go through preschool, which prepares
them for a more formal, systematic, and rigorous type of learning. In elementary,
secondary, and tertiary school, people attempt to understand the world through various
subjects and different types of knowledge through typically singular teaching strategies.
Most graduates become part of the work force while others choose to go beyond tertiary
education and pursue higher academic degrees. Although there are countless of
schools and universities in every country, the education process pretty much stays the
same for everyone because the goal remains the same as well.
According to Prensky (2014), "the real goal of education is becoming-becoming a
'good person' and becoming a more capable person than when you started." William
Butler Yeats, in the meantime, have said that "education is not the filling of a pail, but
the lighting of a fire" (Littky & Grabelle 2004).
Either way, the importance of lifelong learning cannot be emphasized enough.
Education plays a fundamental role in a human's personal and social development,
given that man is both an individual and a social being; one simply cannot think of the
human person outside the context of a community. It is presumably because of
education that the world now faces problems such as poverty, oppression, and war. Yet,
it is also through education that all these problems are expected to be addressed
(Delors 1996). Through the pillars of education that the International Commission on
Education for the 21st Century, 1996 as cited in Delors, 1996. Espouses, we are taught
that education has to address four aspects of learning: Learning in order to know,
learning in order to do, learning so we can live harmoniously with others, and learning in
order to be. Additionally, for the goals of education to be realized, education itself has to
be available and accessible to all.
In its totality, the vision of education for humanity is noble and appropriate.
However, for any given population, statistical data shows that people possess different
aptitude and skill levels depending on standards or expectations that society ultimately
dictates and holds as true. This is what Clough refers to as a "pathology of difference"
(Clough & Corbett 2000). A normal distribution showing student performance would
illustrate that there will always be those performing closely with each other-what
 10

statisticians and educators call the average population-but there will also always be
those who fall at the tail ends of the curve. Those at the extremes would either possess
exceptionally high capabilities or extremely low skill levels. Sometimes, this is because
of a medical, developmental, or neurological disability that a learner has. Other times, it
is because they just happen to be among highly exceptional people. Either way, the fact
remains: teaching strategies that normally work with the average population will not
work the same with those at the extremes. The students would not be able to learn as
fast, as much, and as well as most. With scenarios like these, one eventually would
have to wonder-how does education address this reality? This then becomes the very
definition of Special Education.
Historically, Special Education has been regarded as "an attempt to increase the
fairness of universal public education for exceptional learners* because there are "those
with special difficulties or extraordinary abilities in learning" (Kauffman & Hallahan
2005). Acknowledging learner differences, the essence of special education lies in its
goal to educate a certain population of students, particularly those at the tail ends of a
normal statistical distribution of performance (Thomas & Loxley 2001) (see Figure2.4).
In other words, special education tries to ensure that those perceived to have difficulties
learning will be taught, albeit in a different way.

Figure 2.4. The Normal Distribution of Intelligence

Not everyone reacts to learner diversity the same way. Unfortunately, the default
framework societies seem to operate on remains to be the medical model. As such,
simply asking people to take on a more sociological standpoint appears much more
difficult than it seems. It is unclear as to how society is expected to shift paradigms.
 11

Moreover, it is questionable if we can even reach that point given the discomfort and
resistance others have shown against the social model. It has long been regarded that
the key to nation-building is quality education accessible to all types of learners. This
accessibility is the essence of inclusive education.
III. WHY INCLUSION?
Inclusive education is an educational practice that places students with
disabilities in the general education classroom along with typically developing children
under the supervision and guidance of a general education teacher (Del Corro-Tiangco
2014). It takes root in special needs education and is anchored on the philosophy that
every child has an inherent right to be educated equally with his peers, no matter how
different he or she may appear to society.
The global arena has been consistently vocal in its stand on children, persons
with disabilities, and education. In as early as 1948, there have already been worldwide
declarations on children and their right to be educated (Universal Declaration of Human
Rights 1948; United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989). In 1990,
many countries banded together for the world declaration of Education for All (EFA),
which stated that all children must have access to complete, free, and compulsory
primary education.
Soon after, the UN Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for
Persons with Disabilities (1993) was created. It is in this standard set of rules that each
child's right to education was affirmed. It is also in this directive that the importance of
providing education in integrated and general school settings was first specified. This
mandate was immediately followed by the landmark policy on special education, The
Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education 1994),
which reiterated that schools should accommodate all children, including the disabled,
the gifted, and the marginalized.
These ground breaking directives eventually formed the foundation for other
initiatives: the World Education Forum Framework for Action and the Millennium Summit
of the United Nations, both of which happened in 2000; the EFA Flagship on the Right to
Education for PWDs in 2001; the UN Disability Convention in 2005; the UN Convention
on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2006; and the Education 2030 Framework
for Action following the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. All of these were
created with the same goal in mind: Inclusion.
The Guidelines for Inclusion (2005) published by UNESCO enumerates four key
elements: (1) that inclusion is a process, that is, "a never-ending search to find better
ways to respond to diversity," (2) that inclusion involves a preventive dimension,
specifically in identifying and removing potential barriers to this process through
"collecting, collating, and evaluating information" for improving policy and practice, (3)
that inclusion is all about the "presence, participation, and achievement" or learning
outcomes of all types of students; and (4) that inclusion puts "particular emphasis on
learners who may be at risk of marginalization, exclusion, or underachievement," and
therefore, they must be consistently monitored and represented in the inclusive process.
Figure 2.5 enumerates factors that are distinctly inclusive (Booth and Ainscow 2002).
 12

Inclusion in Education Involves:

A. Valuing all students and staff equally

B. Increasing the participation of students in; and reducing their exclusion from; the
cultures, curricula, and communities of local schools

C. Restructuring the cultures, policies, and practices in schools so that they respond
to the diversity of students in the locality

D. Reducing barriers to learning and participation for all students, not only those with
impairments or those who are categorized as having special educational needs'

E. Learning from attempts to overcome barriers to the access and participation of

particular students to make changes for the benefit of students more widely

F. Viewing the difference between students as resources to support learning, rather

than problems to be overcome

G. Acknowledging the right of students to an education in their locality

H. Improving schools for staff as well as for students

I. Emphasizing the role of schools in building community and developing values, as

well as in increasing achievement

J. Fostering mutually sustaining relationships between schools and communities

K. Recognizing that inclusion in education is one aspect of inclusion in society.

Figure 2.5. Inclusive Education practices by Booth and Ainscow (2002:3).

IV. THE 2030 AGENDA

The goal of inclusion is for every fabric of society to embrace diversity. It is for
this reason that all these treatises state the need for a paradigm shift to address the
issues of inclusion in education. Inclusive education is not merely a call toward
educational reform for those with additional needs. It is simply a call to improve the
quality of education for all learners, because "every learner matters and matters
equally" (UNESCO 2017:12, 2005). This is also reflected in the current framework being
 13

followed for the implementation of inclusive practices, which is the Sustainable

Development Goals (SDGs).
The SDGs are considered road maps or blueprints that were developed by the
United Nations to ensure a better and sustainable future for everyone. It consists of 17
global goals set by the United Nations for the year 2030, each addressing one specific
area of development. Of particular interest to the global education community, however,
is SDG 4: "Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong
learning opportunities for all" (United Nations General Assembly). Therefore, the need to
remove all barriers to inclusion by addressing all forms of exclusion and marginalization
is of utmost importance.
"Philippine Laws for PWDs" (Pangalangan & Litong, 2014)

 BP 344 (1983) - Accessibility Law

o An act to enhance the mobility of disabled persons by requiring certain

buildings, institutions, establishments and public utilities to install
facilities and other devices.

 RA 7277 (1992) - Magna Carta for Disabled Persons

o Equal rights and privileges of PWDs on employment, education, health,

telecommunications, auxiliary social services, accessibility, political, and
civil rights
o Penalties for violations of law

 Administrative Order 35 (2002) - National Disability Prevention and

Rehabilitation (NPDR Week) every 3rd week of July

 Guidelines in the Admission of Students with Disabilities in Higher Education

and Post-Secondary Institutions in the Philippines (2004)

 RA 9442 (2007) - Amendment of RA 7277 (Privileges to PWDs)

o 20% discount privileges to PWDs

o Change name from "Magna Carta for Disabled Persons" to "Magna
Carta for PWDs"
o Added a clause on deliverance from public ridicule and vilification

 NCDA Administrative Order No. 001, s. 2008 - Guidelines on the Issuance of

PWD ID Cards relative to RA 9442

 RA 10070 (2010) - Amendment of RA 7277 (Implementation of Programs and

Services for PWDs in every province, city, and municipality - PDAO Law)
 14

 RA 10366 (2013) - Accessible Polling Places for PWDs and Senior Citizens

 Proclamation No. 688, S. 2013 - Declaring the Period of 2013-2022 as the

Philippine Decade of "Make the Right Real" for PWDs

 RA 10524 (2013) - Amendment of RA 7277 (Expanding the Positions

Reserved for PWDs)

o 1% of all government agencies, offices, corps shall be reserved for

PWDs
o Private companies with over 100 employees are encouraged to reserve
at least 1% for PWDs

 RA 10754 (2016) - An Act Expanding the Benefits and Privileges of PWDs

o Exemption of VAT on the following sale of goods and services

o Inclusion of funeral services

 Civil Service Commission MC No. 20, s. 2017 - express lanes for PWDs in all
commercial and government establishments

 RA 11228 (2019) - Amendment of RA 7277

All PWDs shall be automatically covered by the National Health Insurance
Program (NHIP) of the PhilHealth and that the PhilHealth shall develop exclusive
packages for PWDs that will address their specific health and development needs.
15