Introduction

This article contributes to the discourse on disability from an indigenous perspective, an area about which there is very little known (Grech, 2015; Hickey, 2008; Meekosha, 2008, 2011). It supports the concerns raised by Meekosha that writings on disability have mainly come from 'northern' countries, asking the question: do disabled people in 'southern' countries share the same issues and ideas?

When attempting to answer this question it is necessary to acknowledge the impact of the power structure between the global north and south. Disability scholars from the global south and from indigenous populations within Western colonial settler societies, such as Australia and New Zealand, are putting themselves forward, writing about the impact that their identities and cultural roots have on their reflections and their struggles regarding decolonising their thinking (Barker & Murray, 2010; Hickey, 2008). Rivas Velarde (2015), when reflecting on immersing herself in indigenous issues and colonisation, wrote: "I was not fully aware of the impact of the processes of colonisation, colonialism, and neo-colonial power on the lives of disadvantaged people in the global South. I was not prepared either to reflect deeply about my indigenous roots and how through my so called formal education such values have been silenced" (p.35). The author's notion of oppression and view of decolonisation as a confronting act led her to undertake a process of rescuing her roots and identity, thereby adding to the claim of Grech (2015), who suggested that decolonisation is not simply a metaphor, rather it requires taking on a political process, owned by the global south, to confront colonial lineages, as well as embracing collaboration with the north. Whilst empowering the voice of the global south and working towards reconciliation, this paper reflects the efforts of disability scholars collaborating to decolonise disability.

Current dominant disability discourses do not sufficiently reflect the cultural assimilation or indigenous rights to self-determination from a native rights point of view (Grech, 2015; Meekosha, 2011). Moreover, colonial practices have been linked to high rates of preventable disabilities in the global south (Meekosha, 2008, 2011). However, rates of social deprivation associated with the causation of disability are only part of the issue, and it is equally important to understand how disability is perceived in the global south, particularly by indigenous people. The concept of intersectionality (Crenshaw, 1991) can help in understanding the complexities of how indigeneity and disability identity are compounded and how inequities have been triggered by this intersection. Hickey and Wilson (2017) claim that "being indigenous, having experiences of colonisation and institutionalisation, experiences of racism and discrimination, and living with disabilities gives rise to multiple identities that go unseen by people with or without experiences of disability" (P. 89). They state that this is critical to understanding these identities, as indigenous peoples have to struggle with issues related to race, colonisation, and the marginalisation of disability in their community and society in general. Failing to do so will not only perpetrate segregation, but will also allow disability scholarship to continue theorising about indigenous people without acknowledging their viewpoints, lived experiences and needs.

Indigenous Voices in Disability Studies

Contemporary literature indicates that indigenous communities find the term 'disability' to be alien and somewhat contradictory to their traditional beliefs concerning impairments (Connell, 2011; Hickey, 2008; King, 2010). Nearly two decades ago, Ariotti (1999) conducted a study in Western Australia which revealed that the Anangu people, rather than seeing impairments, celebrated uniqueness and accepted the diversity and difference present within humanity. Subsequently, Meekosha (2011) has urged researchers and policy-makers in Australia to listen to indigenous peoples' concepts of disability, as these are absent from current policy and legislation.

In keeping with the outcomes of the study of the Anangu people, the Māori community in New Zealand has also reported a need for disability to be constructed in a more positive and integrated fashion than is the case in Western scholarship (Fitzgerald, 1997). Māori people see the nature of humanness as a unique and interrelated phenomenon, which connects the past, present, and future through land attachment and spiritual well-being, with interrelations at its core (Hickey, 2008). As such, inter-dependency between heritages, time and space cannot be easily transferred to the Western conceptualisation of humanity. This ancestral Māori conceptualisation embraces differences and uniqueness, and so impairment is a natural part of being. This approach opens up a major divide between the indigenous concept of uniqueness with the non-indigenous concept of impairment and ultimately disability, with indigenous enquiry incorporating non-empirical and non-generalisable dimensions.

Gotto (2009) explored the ways in which people with intellectual impairments were integrated into indigenous communities in Mexico, and reported that such individuals were valued and respected members who were recognised for their contributions, rather than for their impairments. In line with the findings from Mexico and examples from Australia and New Zealand, indigenous traditional beliefs work to welcome individuals as people first, with a reluctance to identify them as different, impaired, 'deficient' or disabled. Shakespeare (1996) cautiously stated that having an impairment may be a common experience, and being disabled is the specific social identity of a minority, yet being disabled as a social identity is not accepted by indigenous people. Watson (2002) also argued that this discrepancy is not exclusive to indigenous peoples and that the use of the term 'disability' has not always been welcomed by non-indigenous groups who are disabled. In his paper entitled 'Well, I know this is going to sound very strange to you, but I don't see myself as a disabled person: identity and disability', Watson (2002) challenged the concept of identity in disability scholarship and argued that 'disabled' persons share one important attribute, which is that they are all subject to oppression regardless of how they identify themselves. Watson (2014) has added strength to Shakespeare's arguments by claiming that culture is both a source of oppression and liberation for disabled individuals. In this sense it is easy to see that what has emerged as a political strategy for the liberation of disabled persons in the global north has arguably widened the divide between the north and the south, thereby reinforcing oppressive ideologies.

Further insight into indigenous identity comes from Barker and Murray (2010), who explained that for some indigenous people the determination of normalcy in wellness and health is dependent upon whether an individual is in balance with his/her spirituality, family, social connections and ancestral attachment to the land. This acknowledgement of indigenous needs is inter-connected with a responsiveness to cultural needs, which is related to cultural competency. However, meeting the needs of indigenous people has been limited to looking at outcomes, as opposed to building theories or discourses that are relevant to disability based upon the experiences of indigenous people (Bickenbach, 1999). In view of the emphasis placed on culture in indigenous groups, the development of a constructivist approach to disability is relevant, as it incorporates both culture and life experiences of indigenous people in the postcolonial era (Snyder and Mitchell, 2007). With such an approach, indigenous identity, self-determination and culture become the driving force for the liberation of indigenous people in the global south through addressing the diversity, uniqueness and history of each indigenous region, tribe and community from around the globe (Bhopal, 2008; Durie, 1998).

When focusing on the importance of indigenous identity, Hickey (2008) used the concept of 'othering' (Foucault, 1972) to describe how disabled indigenous identities have been negatively perceived by non-indigenous people. Foucault (1972) first introduced this concept after working with vulnerable people who were seen as 'other', rather than as having any value. The lack of knowledge production on how disability is perceived in indigenous communities is another aspect of 'othering' and indigenous discrimination (Creamer, 2009). In support of this position, Lavallee and Poole (2010) have argued that knowledge of indigenous peoples' systems and beliefs has been disregarded, whereas this should be incorporated into augmenting, extending and contributing to contemporary disability enquiry.

Furthermore, from an epistemological viewpoint the construction of a discourse on indigenous disability needs to challenge the traditional Western construction of disability knowledge (Meekosha, 2008). Smith (1999) similarly has discussed the 'regimes of truth' which are situated within a particular cultural social system and need to be 'decolonised'. In this context an indigenous approach to disability must confront the epistemology of the Western approach to research, which has concentrated on positivism rather than on research of a participatory nature (Gilroy, 2016; Grech, 2016; Smith, 20007).

Methodology

The qualitative research reported in this article is part of a doctoral thesis which is titled "The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and its Implications for the Health and Wellbeing of Indigenous Peoples with Disabilities" (Rivas Velarde, 2014). One of the aims of this research was to investigate the perceptions of indigenous peoples with disabilities on how their health needs are being met, as well as their impairments, and this paper reports the findings that emerged.

Australia, Mexico and New Zealand were selected for this study, as the variation and parallels between these countries allowed for the identification of facilitators and barriers to the representation of the indigenous voice. These three countries are all signatories to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), have a shared history of colonisation, and each recognise the existence of indigenous peoples. The sample countries were selected to represent a spread of political, geographical and historical differences in order to gain insights into the diversity of lived experiences across indigenous groups. In addition, this enabled implications for international policy development to be identified.

In total 50 participants took part in the doctoral study, including indigenous persons with disabilities, health workers, senior decision-makers, and policy-makers who represented their country as official delegates during the negotiations on the CRPD from Australia, New Zealand and Mexico. This paper focuses on 18 indigenous individuals with disabilities who come from these countries.

Findings

Conclusions

There is an urgent need to create a dialogue between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples in relation to their understanding of disability and impairment. The emerging literature reveals that disability scholars from the global north and south need to engage in further reflection on the language and concepts concerning disability, and it is important that such reflections address how colonialism and the resulting social disadvantages have led to dislocation, the loss of land rights and disruption to traditional livelihoods, resulting in violence, substance abuse and mental health issues. These factors are recognised as being correlated to high rates of impairment, and a meaningful dialogue about the experiences of impairment and disability amongst indigenous peoples cannot occur in an historical vacuum.

The findings from this research suggest that indigenous persons with disabilities from Australia, Mexico and New Zealand share some common standpoints, particularly in relation to their common experiences of social oppression, the importance placed on family ties and community networks, as well as spirituality.

It is critical to open up a dialogue that allows for further reflection on uneven power structures and ontologies of disability. Such a dialogue needs to be of an emancipatory nature, allowing reflection on on-going colonisation and its impact on social structures and academic discourses. It is necessary to start the dialogue within disability studies about what it means to be discriminated against, together with addressing and challenging the lack of agency to become self-determining from an indigenous perspective. Opening up such a dialogue will in turn legitimise the use of epistemologies and methodologies that enhance the voice of indigenous peoples from the global south (Barker, 2010; Denzin, 2008; Smith, 2007).

It is important to also look at the process archive, as since the data was collected the National Centre of Mental Health Research, Information and Workforce Development in New Zealand has published 'Te Reo Hāpai - The Language of Enrichment', which contains more than 200 Māori words, terms and whakatauki, proverbs that play a large role in Māori culture. The CRPD has been translated into Te Reo Māori, and these efforts represent an important step forward in acknowledging political participation and enabling meaningful engagement with indigenous worldviews concerning impairment and disability.

This paper contributes to the decolonisation of Disability Studies by presenting the views of indigenous persons from the global south and their claims for self-determination. It also calls for further reflection about on-going colonisation and an in-depth analysis of the lack of attention given to this issue within the main models of disability.