Right to Play for Children with Disabilities

Abstract

The following research study seeks to examine problematic discourses around children with disabilities and their right to play, through a critical disability studies and children’s rights lens. This paper will argue that inadequate understandings of children’s varied definitions of play can lead to exclusion in non-institutional and institutional settings. Through the use of photovoice and interview analysis, we sought to take a holistic approach to understanding the varied ways children with disabilities, and educational assistants, answered questions surrounding “what is play?” Our findings align with the notion that the right of children with disabilities to play is complex and interdisciplinary. Bridging access to cultivate appropriate inclusion through awareness, applicable school programming, and a redefined definition and discourse around play, is crucial for children to authentically participate in their version of play, as defined by themselves. Valuing children’s full right to play, as defined by the UNCRC, allows for a greater understanding of the social and political complexities of working with children instead of challenging their ability to advocate for themselves. 2019 Canadian Journal of Children’s Rights 198 The ability to understand and implement the rights of all children is crucial to working with children. Children's rights are frequently overlooked, which results in the further suppression of rights for children with disabilities. Building upon this knowledge is crucial not only to recognizing children as people, but also to empowering and educating them about their rights. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) outlines various rights that children possess; however, the explanations are vague in construction. Article 31 of the UNCRC defines the right to play as: “the right of the child to rest and leisure, to engage in play and recreational activities appropriate to the age of the child and to participate freely in cultural life and the arts” (OHCHR, 2002, p. 9). This definition excludes consideration of the different forms of play that children may engage in. The UNCRC’s assumption that play must be “age-appropriate” is problematic when reflecting upon the mental versus chronological age of children at play. Developmental psychology approaches focus on "typical" stages of development, considering age and a child's respective abilities. This model applies a linear model of cross-childhood development to children with disabilities, neglecting to consider the interdisciplinary nature of childhoods. Critical disability studies contest the exclusions of a linear model of development, by moving towards inclusion through authentically listening to the voices and experiences of children with disabilities (Curran & Runswick-Cole, 2014). For our paper, play will be defined as "a dynamic, active, and constructive behaviour, considered from a variety of perspectives theoretical, parental, and childhoods. Play can be both socially and cognitively beneficial to children’s development” (Glenn, Knight, Holt, & Spence, 2012). This definition allows for a better understanding of the various perspectives of development that can shape children’s innate right to play. The objective of this article is to improve advocacy and to gain a better understanding of children with disabilities and their right to play. Identifying the legal right to play as more accessible for certain bodies, as opposed to others, increases the urgency for greater advocacy. We attempt to uncover issues surrounding play for children with disabilities and to redefine play throughout our research collection and literature review. In identifying and challenging inequality, it is crucial to focus on the voices and experiences of children while considering the role of play intervention (Curran & Runswick-Cole, 2014). This paper will take a person-first language approach of “children with disabilities,” to support the rights-based 2019 Canadian Journal of Children’s Rights 199 approach, focusing on the child. We identify four key themes from our research: a lack of awareness surrounding a rights-based approach to childhoods, a lack of inclusion in play for these children, the importance of programming, and the need for a redefinition of play. From a childhood studies and critical disability studies perspective, we argue that inadequate understandings of children’s varied definitions of play lead to exclusion in institutional and noninstitutional settings.