Societal culture, space, and structure have been unprecedentedly disrupted during the COVID-19 pandemic creating disproportionate vulnerability for disabled people. However, the upheaval of many societal conditions has presented enabling opportunities for disabled people. We report on interviews with 30 disabled people during the first four-week Aotearoa New Zealand COVID-19 lockdown. Three key themes were interpreted: “I am experiencing less disability on a daily basis,” encapsulating the experience of reduced disabling barriers for participants; “Working from home: the flexibility I have been asking for,” summarizing the benefits of functioning in an enabling home/work space; and “Social connection opportunities are the same for everyone,” overviewing participants reports that online opportunities presented a greater sense of belonging than before lockdown. Study findings highlight that despite a constant fear of the negative impact posed by COVID-19, there were numerous opportunities to reduce ablism through applying empowering factors inherent in novel cultural spaces.
AmmarA.ChtourouH.BoukhrisO.TrabelsiK.MasmoudiL.BrachM., . . . on behalf of the Eclb-Covid Consortium. (2020). COVID-19 home confinement negatively impacts social participation and life satisfaction: A worldwide multicenter study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(17), 6237. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17176237
2.
BakerM. G.KvalsvigA.VerrallA. J. (2020). New Zealand’s COVID-19 elimination strategy. The Medical Journal of Australia, 213(5), 198–200e1. https://doi.org/10.5694/mja2.50735
3.
BakerM. G.WilsonN.AnglemyerA. (2020). Successful elimination of Covid-19 transmission in New Zealand. The New England Journal of Medicine, 383(8), e56. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc2025203
4.
BogartK. R.DunnD. S. (2019). Ableism special issue introduction. Journal of Social Issues, 75(3), 650–664. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12354
5.
BourkeJ. A.Hay-SmithE. J. C.SnellD. L.SchluterP. J. (2017). Community inclusion of wheelchair users during the long-term recovery phase following the 2010/2011 Canterbury earthquakes. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 23, 169–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2017.05.004
6.
BoyleC. A.FoxM. H.HavercampS. M.ZublerJ. (2020). The public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic for people with disabilities. Disability and Health Journal, 13(3), 100943. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2020.100943
7.
BraunV.ClarkeV. (2022). Conceptual and design thinking for thematic analysis. Qualitative Psychology, 9(1), 3–26. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/qup0000196
8.
BromleyR. D. F.MatthewsD. L.ThomasC. J. (2007). City centre accessibility for wheelchair users: The consumer perspective and the planning implications. Cities, 24(3), 229–241.
9.
CaroppoE.MazzaM.SannellaA.MaranoG.AvalloneC.ClaroA. E.. . . SaniG. (2021). Will nothing be the same again? Changes in lifestyle during COVID-19 pandemic and consequences on mental health. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(16), 8433.
10.
ChouinardV. (1997). Making space for disabling differences: Challenging ableist geographies: Situating disabling differences. Environment and Planning: Society and Space, 15(4), 379–387. https://doi.org/10.1068/d150379
11.
EpsteinS.CampanileJ.CerilliC.GajwaniP.VaradarajV.SwenorB. K. (2021). New obstacles and widening gaps: A qualitative study of the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on U.S. adults with disabilities. Disability and Health Journal, 14(3), 101103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2021.101103
12.
FineM. (2019). Critical disability studies: Looking back and forward. Journal of Social Issues, 75(3), 972–984. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12344
13.
FjordK. (2007). Disasters, race, and disability: [Un]seen through the political lens on Katrina. The Journal of Race and Policy, 3(1), 46–65.
14.
FjordK.MandersonL. (2009). Anthropological perspectives on disasters and disability: An introduction. Human Organization, 68(1), 64–72.
15.
FoxM. H.WhiteG. W.RooneyC.CahillA. (2010). The psychosocial impact of hurricane Katrina on persons with disabilities and independent living centre staff living on the American Gulf Coast. Rehabilitation Psychology, 55(3), 231–240.
16.
GiuntellaO.HydeK.SaccardoS.SadoffS. (2021). Lifestyle and mental health disruptions during COVID-19. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 118(9), e2016632118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2016632118
17.
GoodleyD. (2014). Ableism. In GoodleyD. (Ed.), Dis/ability studies: Theorising disablism and ableism (1st ed., pp. 21–34). Routledge.
18.
HjelleK. M.VikK. (2011). The ups and downs of social participation: Experiences of wheelchair users in Norway. Disability and Rehabilitation, 33(25–26), 2479–2489.
JesusT. S.BhattacharjyaS.PapadimitriouC.BogdanovaY.BentleyJ.Arango-LasprillaJ. C., . . . The Refugee Empowerment Task Force and International Networking Group of the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. (2021). Lockdown-related disparities experienced by people with disabilities during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic: Scoping review with thematic analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(12), 6178. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18126178
22.
JesusT. S.KamalakannanS.BhattacharjyaS.BogdanovaY.Arango-LasprillaJ. C.BentleyJ., . . . The Refugee Empowerment Task Force and International Networking Group of the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. (2021). PREparedness, REsponse and SySTemic Transformation (PRE-RE-SyST): A model for disability-inclusive pandemic responses and systemic disparities reduction derived from a scoping review and thematic analysis. International Journal for Equity in Health, 20(1), Article 204. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-021-01526-y
23.
JesusT. S.LandryM. D.JacobsK. (2020). A “new normal” following COVID-19 and the economic crisis: Using systems thinking to identify challenges and opportunities in disability, telework, and rehabilitation. Work, 67, 37–46. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-203250
24.
KelmanI.StoughL. (2015). Disability and disaster: Explorations and exchanges. Palgrave Macmillan.
25.
KuperH.BanksL. M.BrightT.DabyC.ShakespeareT. (2020). Disability-inclusive COVID-19 response: What it is, why it is important and what we can learn from the United Kingdom’s response [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]. Wellcome Open Research, 5, 79.
26.
MitraM.TurkM. A. (2021). Mental health impacts of COVID-19 on people with disabilities: A call to action. Disability and Health Journal, 14(3), 101147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2021.101147
27.
MladenovT.BrennanC. S. (2021). The global COVID-19 disability rights monitor: Implementation, findings, disability studies response. Disability & Society, 36, 1356–1361. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2021.1920371
28.
MorrowB. H. (1999). Identifying and mapping community vulnerability. Disasters, 23(1), 1–18.
29.
Nario-RedmondM. R. (2019). Introduction. In Nario-RedmondM. R. (Ed.), Ableism (pp. 1–36). John Wiley.
30.
PachecoE.YoongP.LipsM. (2021). Transition issues in higher education and digital technologies: The experiences of students with disabilities in New Zealand. Disability & Society, 36(2), 179–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2020.1735305
31.
PatonD.JohnsonD. (2001). Disasters and communities: Vulnerability, resilience and preparedness. Disaster Prevention and Management, 10(4), 270–277.
32.
PeekL.StoughL. M. (2010). Children with disabilities in the context of disaster: A social vulnerability perspective. Child Development, 81(4), 1260–1270. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01466
33.
PerryM. A.InghamT.JonesB.Mirfin-VeitchB. (2020). “At risk” and “vulnerable!” Reflections on inequities and the impact of COVID-19 on disabled people. New Zealand Journal of Physiotherapy, 48(3), 107–116. https://doi.org/10.15619/NZJP/48.3.02
34.
PhillipsB. (2015). Inclusive emergency management. In KelmanI.StoughL. (Eds.), Disability and disaster: Explorations and exchanges (pp. 30–49). Palgrave Macmillan.
35.
PriestleyM.HemingwayL. (2007). Disability and disaster recovery. Journal of Social Work in Disability & Rehabilitation, 5(3–4), 23–42. https://doi.org/10.1300/J198v05n03_02
36.
SchurL. A.AmeriM.KruseD. (2020). Telework after COVID: A “silver lining” for workers with disabilities?Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 30(4), 521–536. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-020-09936-5
37.
Statistics New Zealand. (2014). Disability survey: 2013. Statistics New Zealand.
38.
Statistics New Zealand. (2021). Labour market statistics June 2021 quarter. Statistics New Zealand.
39.
StoughL. M.DucyE. M.HoltJ. M. (2017). Changes in the social relationships of individuals with disabilities displaced by disaster. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 24, 474–481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2017.06.020
40.
TerryG.HayfieldN. (2021). Essentials of thematic analysis. American Psychological Association.
41.
VicenteM. R.LópezA. J. (2010). A multidimensional analysis of the disability digital divide: Some evidence for internet use. The Information Society, 26(1), 48–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/01615440903423245
42.
Whalley HammellK. (2021). Building back better: Imagining an occupational therapy for a post-COVID-19 world. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 68(5), 444–453. https://doi.org/10.1111/1440-1630.12760
43.
World Health Organization. (2011). World report on disability.
44.
World Health Organization. (2013). Building back better: Sustainable mental health care after emergencies.
45.
YoungR. E.GoldbergJ. O.StruthersC. W.McCannD.PhillsC. E. (2019). The subtle side of stigma: Understanding and reducing mental illness stigma from a contemporary prejudice perspective. Journal of Social Issues, 75(3), 943–971. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12343
