Economic and Occupational Profile of the Rural Disabled Women: A Study of Raichur District of Karnataka

 

Lloyd Vicky D’Souza¹, Dr. Mohan S. Singhe²

¹Research Scholar, Department of PG Studies and Research in Social Work, Mangalore University, Mangalagangothri

²Assistant Professor, Department of PG Studies and Research in Social Work, Mangalore University, Mangalagangothri

 

ABSTRACT:

Money or wealth is an inevitable commodity for a satisfied living. Employment produces wealth. As livelihood sustains the inflow of wealth; and this wealth in turn satisfies the material needs and enhances a feeling of security and self-worth, it is ideally best for an individual to be employed. Studies show that the disabled are the poorest of the poor as they are denied opportunities of almost all the basic requirements of life such as education, employment, social interactions, companionship, family life, health, etc. Being a woman along with a disability and living in a rural scenario further devastates life. This paper provides an overview of the life of disabled women living in rural areas in context of their livelihood, through quantitative analysis on 250 rural women with locomotor disability, selected systematically using the multi-stage random sampling method. It was found that most of the locomotor disabled rural women (LDRW) contributed to the household economy through indirect means such as looking after the household chores. About a quarter of them don’t contribute either through direct or indirect means. Problems of unemployment, underemployment, low income, no training, lack of opportunities and societal prejudices persisted. An association between level of education and magnitude of disability was found with employment, and level of education and income were found to be statistically significant and positively correlated. The study suggests that training, education, opportunities and positive societal attitudes can lead to a better livelihood which in turn could enhance the quality of life of the disabled rural women.

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

Employment is a life sustainer, which caters to most of the materialistic needs of a human being. Employment outlines ability to provide for self and other dependents. Work creates wealth, and provides a sense of security to the individual and wealth displays status and power of a person.

 

 

Disability portrays feebleness and disease, and hence the disabled are assumed as dependents. Disabled are a category of people who are deprived of opportunities of a livelihood due to the condition of their appearance and assumed ineligibility for work. People with disabilities are less likely to have access to earning, opportunities for employment and education, training and rehabilitation. Disability has the power to intensify poverty individually and at family level. The persons with disability are found to attain lower educational qualifications and work opportunities in India¹. Disabled are often considered as a burden social as well as economic, not only by able bodied people but also by the disabled themselves. One of the findings in the present study itself brings to light that more than half of the LDRW felt that they are a burden to their families and wanted to contribute to the family economy. Disabled people are not only among the poorest of the poor but also that they remain so for a longer time and from generation to generation². Disability marginalizes people, social constructs of gender and prejudices associated with gender further supplements to their misery as being a disabled and over it a women, reduces the chance of all the provisions and requirements for a standard life in the society which includes a livelihood. It is seen that the work opportunities are more in urban areas than the rural areas, and migration of the rural population to the urban centers in search of livelihood stands as an evidence to it. Employment rates of persons with disability vary with geographical location (urban or rural), gender, education, and type of disability. The rural disabled are significantly disconnected from skills and markets³.Understanding all these critical situations the work-life of the disabled women who reside in the rural regions can be jeopardized three folds. This paper is an attempt to analyze the exclusion and the initiatives for inclusion in the domain of livelihood of the locomotor disabled rural women (LDRW).

 

OBJECTIVE:

The aim of this paper is to understand and analyze the livelihood and the economic domain of the disabled women living in rural areas. This paper also examines the barriers to their employment and attempts to suggest measures for an inclusive life in the livelihood sector.

 

METHOD:

The present investigation is a cross-sectional descriptive study. Quantitative information was collected from 250 locomotor disabled rural women of Raichur District in the age group of 18 to 59. The tool used for the data collection was a self-prepared and self-administered semi-structured interview schedule. The respondents were selected through multi-stage sampling technique. With 10 respondents being selected from each randomly selected villagepanchayath of the 5 taluks of the district making it 50 respondents from each of the 5 taluks.

 

RESULTS AND ANALYSIS:

Table 1 throws light on the occupational status of the rural, locomotor disabled women. It can be noted that 26.4 percent of the population are home makers. Indian women are expected to take care of the house whereas the men of the house play the role of the bread earner.

 

However the women who work outside home also have the responsibility of working as a home maker and is seldom helped in the household chores by their male counterparts.

 

Table 1. Occupational Profile of the LDRW

Occupation	Respondents	Percentage
None	59	23.6%
House Wife	66	26.4%
Family Business/agriculture	12	4.8%
Daily wage earners	26	10.4%
Petty Shop/Handicrafts	5	2.0%
Teachers	7	2.8%
Self Employed	39	15.6%
Honorary Workers	17	6.8%
Students	16	6.4%
Office Goers	3	1.2%
Factory Workers	0	0.0%
Total	250	100.0%

 

The findings of this study also are reflected in the deliberations of Hosamane (2007) who observed that being a homemaker is the only preferable job for a women in male dominated societies, and a lack of education and vocational training, makes it even more difficult to get employment for the disabled women⁴. The above table also shows that a significant percentage (23.6%) of the respondents are neither home makers nor are they working for a livelihood. Which can be interpreted that these women do not contribute to the work force either directly or indirectly. This can be reflected in the writings of K.S. Ganesh (2008) who observed that half of the disabled were unemployed⁵. It can be noted that if home makers were to be considered as unemployed the data in the present study too will show the same result.

 

It can be learnt from the table that only 15.6 percent of the overall sample population are self-employed. Where most of them work as tailors or shopkeepers in Raichur it was revealed through the qualitative data that a few contribute to the economy by preparing roties for nearby Khanawalis (canteens). Nearly 1.2 percent of the population are office goers.

 

It is notable that 6.8 percent of the total respondents work as honorary volunteers which include, Anganwadi workers, School cooks, Asha Worker and VRW’s. Amazingly the respondents who contribute in the work force excluding management of household tasks is around 43.6 percent. A major portion of the respondents contribute to the work force through indirect means, of working as a home maker which is an unpaid job. There was also a small proportion of the respondents that served in their family business and family agriculture they too are unpaid.

 

Table 2. Reasons for not going for remunerative work

Reason for not going to work	Respondents	Percentage
No one to look after home	5	3.5%
Satisfied with being a House Wife	13	9.2%
Trying to Find a Suitable Job	5	3.5%
No opportunity and No Guidance	85	60.3%
I cannot due to my Disability	17	12.1%
Student	16	11.3%
Total	141	100.0%

The above table depicts that 60.3 percent of the respondents said that the reason for not going for a job was that they had no opportunity or no guidance to go for a job. Which implies that, if provided with adequate training and opportunity these locomotor disabled women could be mainstreamed in the workforce of the country. Handicapped with proper vocational guidance and training can equal or exceed other workers in productivity and dependability, yet they have a great difficulty in finding employment⁶.

 

The data also reveals that 12.1 percent of the respondents feel that they cannot do any remunerative work since they are disabled. They might be under such a notion since they see the work other people do around them and compare themselves with the temporarily able bodied but fail to recognize the abilities in them and count only the inabilities. Studies also show that disability is caused not from the personal inabilities but by the disabling environment that the individual lives in. Consequently giving such respondents training and an insight to do the work which they are capable of can make their lives economically viable. Jayakumar, (2005) in his works too finds and stresses the need for training and motivation to the disabled through CBR to earn income⁷. In the present study the Chi-square test also revealed that there is a statistically significant association between the magnitude of disability and occupation as well as occupation and the self-esteem of the LDRW (p<0.01)

 

It was also found from this study that most of the respondents (76.4%) are of the opinion that they do not receive opportunities according to their capacities. The analysis reveals that there is large scope to utilize the unexplored human resource in the guise of the disabled population amidst us. Employment is one of the major factors which can sustainably enhance worth of life. In the study it can be observed that a majority of the respondents perceive that they are underestimated about their capacities and hence are either unutilized or under-utilized assuming that they cannot do certain jobs. There is a strong need for Social work intervention in such context to make the disabled understand their capacities, articulate them and find suitable means of employment.

 

Table 3. Nature of job of the LDRW

Nature of Job	Respondents	Percentage
Government	0	0.0%
Private	93	85.3%
Contractual	16	14.7%
Total	109	100.0%

 

The table numbered 3 draws attention to the nature of job of the respondents. As the above question is relevant to only the respondents who work other than household work, only 109 applicable respondents have been considered. The table brings to light that the percentage of LDRW working in private sector is 85.3 percent. Contractual nature of jobs are an emerging trend of the present job scenario, wherein 14.7 percent of the respondents work. None of the LDRW in the sample was a government employee and this can be a consequence of lower educational level or lack of awareness about the reservation scheme which is reflected in table number 4.

 

Table 4. Awareness and Utilization of reservation in government job

Reservations in government jobs	Respondents	%
Unaware	212	84.8%
Aware	32	12.8%
Applied	6	2.4%
Received	0	0.0%
Total	250	100.0%

 

The government of India has specifically reserved 3% in A and B category posts and 5% reservations in C and D category posts of the government jobs for the economic empowerment of the disabled. The above table focusing on the data pertaining to the awareness and utilization of reservations in government jobs depicts that a vast majority of 84.8 percent of the respondents are not aware of such reservations in jobs and none of the respondents has benefited through reservation in job sector.

 

Table 5. Monthly remuneration of the LDRW

Monthly remuneration in rupees	Respondents	Percentage
Not paid as it is family business	11	10.1%
1000 and below	20	18.3%
1001-5000	75	68.8%
5001-10000	2	1.8%
10001-15000	0	0.0%
15001-20000	1	0.9%
20001 and above	0	0.0%
Total	109	100.0%

 

The data on monthly remuneration for the work done is exclusively limited to the 109 (43.6% of total respondents) respondents who contribute in the work force other than household work and does not include the monetary assistance that the respondents get through the disability pension scheme. The above table reveals that a majority (68.8%) of the respondents’ monthly income from all sources range between rupees 1001 – rupees 5000 and only 0.9 percent of the respondents earn above 10,000 rupees. Around 18.3 percent of the respondents earn less than 1000 rupees and 10.1 percent do not receive any personal remuneration as they work in their own family businesses or agricultural activities. The study also found statistically significant positive relation between level of education and level of income (p< 0.01 and r = .381). The findings of the study matches with that of Hosamane (2007) who states that if ever a work opportunity is obtained it is tormented by issues of low salary, travelling, sanitation needs and abuses⁴. Hence the women with disabilities are prone to dependency and are considered as a financial burden on the family members.

Table 6. Provision of material needs

Provision of Material needs	Respondents	Percentage
Self by earning	67	26.8%
Self by begging	1	0.4%
Family	180	72.0%
Only pension and ration	2	0.8%
Total	250	100.0%

 

The above table helps in understanding the autonomy of the locomotor disabled women. More than seventy percent of the respondents (72.0%) depend on their family members for fulfillment of their material needs and basic necessities. This include the Non-workers, the Home-makers, and even the respondents who work but do not earn enough, and the respondents who do not have an authority over their own earnings. It can be noted that 26.8 percent of the respondents have an economic independence and take care of their material needs through their own earnings. It is also seen that 0.4 percent of the respondents depend on alms and 0.8 percent respondents’ only source of life maintenance is the Disability Pension and food allowance through PDS (Public Distribution System).

 

It can be observed in table 1 that 43.6 percent of the respondents are involved in some or the other kind of remunerative work. But the above table states that only 26.8 percent manage their material needs by themselves and do not depend on their families for their fulfillment. This shows that a vast majority of the working women are either paid very low which is revealed in table number 5 through which they cannot afford for their needs or the lack of authority and freedom on their earnings which came to be discussed with most of the LDRW through qualitative information that their payment is either collected by their husbands or they hand over their salaries to their husbands.

 

Table 7. Awareness and Utilization ofAadhara Scheme

Aadhara Scheme	Respondents	Percentage
Unaware	236	94.4%
Aware	9	3.6%
Applied	2	.8%
Received	3	1.2%
Total	250	100.0%

 

Aadhara is a Kannada term which means Support or Reliance. This is a scheme of the government of Karnataka for the disabled. Under this financial assistance scheme an amount of Rs. 20,000 is given as an interest free loan as working capital along with a Kiosk worth Rs. 15,000 to set up a petty shop. The table numbered 7 shows that a vast majority of 94.4 percent of the respondents are unaware of the Adhara Scheme and only 1.2 percent have availed the benefit of this scheme.

 

Table 8 highlights the suggestions of the LDRW for their development. The table represents 219 respondents out of 250 as 31 respondents were not confident to express what they needed. Many of the respondents said that they did not know what to ask for and that the government knows what is better for them. It can be seen thus that many of the women living with disability lack self-confidence. And self-confidence develops through education, livelihood, interaction and social involvement which was observed to be absent or less among most of the respondents as for the respondents who expressed too did so over repeated questioning and persuasion by the researcher. It was seen that a majority of 27.4 percent of the respondents suggested to increase the disability assistance amount.

 

 

Table 8. Suggestions from LDRW for their development.

Suggestions expressed by LDRW	Respondents	Percentage
Increase Pension Amount	60	27.4%
Loan/ Subsidies	6	2.7%
All Schemes/Awareness	13	5.9%
Opportunity in Sports/ Games	1	0.5%
Tailoring Machine	9	4.1%
Self-Employment	55	25.1%
Job	55	25.1%
Animals for Rearing	3	1.4%
Shop	5	2.3%
Land to Cultivate	1	0.5%
Educate our Children	1	0.5%
Scholarships	6	2.7%
Scooter	3	1.4%
Increase Kms. in bus pass	1	0.5%
Total	219	100.0%

 

 

It can be observed that more than half of the LDRW (61.2%) had suggestions related to employment and livelihood which included the provision for a job, training and assistance in self-employment, provision for tailoring machines, loans and subsidies, animals for rearing, shop and land to cultivate. There were around four percent (3.3%) suggestions on education and scholarships, three of the respondents suggested that the government provide educational scholarships for the children of the disabled as they were unable to meet the educational expenses of their children. And a few of the respondents asked for increased amount in scholarships and appropriate information of them. Over all most of the suggestions revolved around economy as they too understood that their quality of life mostly depends on wealth generation.

 

SUGGESTION AND CONCLUSION:

People with disabilities face serious barriers in getting jobs. They also face social and psychological barriers - ignorance, myths, prejudice, stereotyping and misconceptions about their capacities, acceptance by fellow workers, and low self-esteem, fear and over-protective families. Bringing about changes to existing infrastructure is a key need to improving access for the physically disabled, with employers also often reluctant to provide accessibility and supportive facilities⁸.

 

As livelihood is an integral part of life for survival with dignity, no attitude and barriers of the society should hinder a person from working, be it an able bodied or a disabled, man or a woman and urban or rural. Appropriate trainings, education and opportunities should be provided to the LDRW. In cases where the women with disabilities are under an impression that they can to nothing appropriate counselling should help to motivate them. Social workers and practitioners in the field of disability have a larger role to play in unveiling abilities of the disabled.

 

Hostels for the working women should have reservations for the women with disabilities. And if there is a need for separate hostels for the WWD such hostels need to be made available in collaboration of governmental and non-governmental agencies. Job consultancies specifically for the disabled needs to get a boost. And the existing job consultancies can be encouraged to find appropriate jobs for eligible disabled and the more vulnerable among the disabled. Job consultancies that provide job opportunities to the underprivileged should be recognized and rewarded appropriately. Private companies too can find appropriate job positions in their institutes for the eligible disabled and hire them making their lives too economically sustainable.

 

There is a felt need to rehabilitate the WWD in their own rural settings as moving towards urban areas will not be feasible due to mobility, social and economic reasons. Hence appropriate subsidized loan schemes to start businesses for the PWD in the rural areas should be initiated. Schemes to provide land for agriculture, animals for rearing, and training in enterprises that fetch good returns in the rural scenario needs to be instigated.  Work from home options serve as a blessing in disguise for both the employer and the disabled employee as infrastructural modifications need not be carried out. More than all awareness and information regarding schemes for the disabled needs to be made available to the disabled especially women so that the utilization of the available assistance be increased. As it was found that education increases chances of employment and the income, no disabled should be barred from getting education. Hence improving their quality of life through providing livelihood opportunities for the people with disabilities.

 

CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

The authors declare no conflict of interest

 

 

 

REFERENCE:

1.     Deb, S. (2016, August 25). The Nexus between Disability and Poverty: Analysis Based on States data in India. Retrieved from www.iariw.org: www.iariw.org/dresden/deb2.pdf

2.     Rao, A. N. (2009, March 1). Poverty and disability in India. Sage Journals, 29-45. Retrieved from Sage Journals: journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/004908570903900102

3.     Government of India . (2011). Disability in India- A statistical profile. Ministry of Statistics & Program Implementation, Government of India. .

4.     Hosamane, S. B. (2007, May 31). Developing the Gender Dimension in Indias Disability Rights Movement. Retrieved from www.isiswomen.org: http://www.isiswomen.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=659:developing-the-gender-dimension-in-indias-disability-rights-movement&catid=125&Itemid=452

5.     Ganesh, K. S., Das, A., & J.S.Shashi. (2008, July-September). Epidemiology of disability in a rural community of Karnataka. Indian Journal of Public Health, 52(3), 125-129. Retrieved from http://www.ijph.in/temp/IndianJPublicHealth523125-7327049_020207.pdf

6.     Paul B. Horton, G. R. (1981). The Sociology of social problems. New Jersey: PRENTICE-HALL.

7.     Jayakumar, E. C. (2005). Capacity Building of the Physically Challenged through Community Based Rehabilitation. Social Change , 70-84.

8.     UNDP. (2012). Livelihood Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities. Author India.

 

 

 

 

Received on 08.08.2018       Modified on 10.09.2018

Accepted on 16.10.2018      ©A&V Publications All right reserved