A critical perspective on the social inclusion children with disabilities in Montenegro: Addressing Social Norms Case Study by Ida Ferdinandi, Child Protection Officer UNICEF Montenegro Philadelphia, USA, 12 July 2013 Penn-UNICEF Summer Programme 2013: Advances in Social Norms and Social Change

Structure 1.Description of the challenge 2.Critical Evaluation of the Work So Far 3.Change in Practices

Description of the challenge Independent state since 2006 (192 nd Member State of the United Nations) EU candidate country since 2010 Children with disabilities socially excluded Focus of the paper: “Children with disabilities ought to be hidden from public view”

Description of the challenge Empirical expectations Parents of CWD as well as the rest of the population expect that parents of CWD hide their children at home or place them in specialized institutions Normative expectations Parents of CWD and the rest of the population alike believe that other people think that CWD should be hidden at home -- or placed in specialized institutions

Description of the challenge Parents “those parents who want their children to die before they themselves die” - a parent of a CWD Other people Overt strong disapproval and objections to setting up services for CWD in their neighbourhood - “social sanction” the “special reason for their disapproval is the fact that the elementary school children will be in direct contact with children who are in need of special treatment, which may have negative effects on both” (letter by petitioners) “children with special needs” will be “slaughtered like pigs” (Facebook).

Description of the challenge Increased social inclusion of children with disabilities in recent years Change is not taking place evenly across society

Critical Evaluation of the Work So Far Reform of the legal framework  NOT SUFFICIENT Associations of parents of CWD  VOICE? “It’s About Ability”  ADDRESSING SOCIAL NORMS?

Critical Evaluation of the Work So Far Events: discussions, decisions, commitments Schema: ‘protecting children from harm’ New scripts: Paralympics and the Special Olympics New empirical expectations: Billboards & participation Normative expectations: inviting people to join the campaign. Measuring: KAP studies

Critical Evaluation of the Work So Far Asking other types of questions, hypothetical, counterfactual, and questions about other people. – “Do other people like you mind if a CWD goes to the same class with their child?”, – “What would happen if a small group home were to be constructed in your neighbourhood? Would your neighbours object to it?”, – “Do other parents of CWD hide their children at home?”, – “Do other people think that parents of CWD ought to hide children at home? (a few agree/many agree/everyone agrees/who agrees)” etc.

Change in Practices Measuring Local level National level Enhance KAP surveys on CWD, or combine with other types of research

Change in Practices Measuring Local level National level Make it more local Core group Deliberations Take it to the streets Include different groups Diffusion

Change in Practices Measuring Local level National level Celebrate successes More discussions

Measuring Local level National level Enabling environment Change in Practices

THANK YOU