A/HRC/43/27 13. The charity model of disability considers persons with disabilities as passive objects of kind (charitable) acts or welfare recipients only, rather than as empowered individuals with equal rights. Under this model, disability is an individual’s problem and persons with disabilities are not considered capable of providing for themselves on account of their impairments; rather, they are considered as a burden on society, which bestows its benevolence on them. Persons with disabilities, under this perspective, are considered the objects of pity, dependent on the goodwill of others, and are thereby disempowered and not in control of their own lives, participating little or not all in society. The effect of this model is that society’s responses are limited to care and assistance, with individuals being reduced to recipients of charity and welfare only, instead of its guaranteeing them the enjoyment of their rights. 14. The medical model of disability considers persons with disabilities as objects of treatment, as patients to be cured, and disability as a medical problem that needs to be solved or an illness that needs to be treated. Under this model, disability resides in the individual and doctors know best how to correct and manage any impairment, regardless of the consent, will and preferences of the individual. Persons with disabilities, under this model, are considered as deviating from the physical and mental norms and their behaviours and attitudes are pathologized. The effect of this model is that society’s responses seek to normalize and diminish impairments as a means to enabling participation, instead of removing barriers. 15. In a similar manner to racism, sexism or ageism, “ableism” is commonly described as the belief system that underlies the negative attitudes, stereotypes and stigma that devalue persons with disabilities on the basis on their actual or perceived impairments. Ableism considers persons with disabilities as being less worthy of respect and consideration, less able to contribute and participate, and of less inherent value than others. Whereas other discriminatory discourse is increasingly challenged by public opinion, ableism continues to legitimize the rhetoric behind different forms of discrimination. Ableism may be conscious or unconscious, and may be entrenched in institutions, systems and the broader culture of society. It limits the opportunities of persons with disabilities and reduces their inclusion in community life. 4 Stigmatization, stereotyping and prejudice 16. Persons with disabilities face stigmatization based on their actual or perceived impairments. Stigmatization has different sources and is usually very context specific and impairment based. Consequently, persons with physical impairments face different forms of stigmatization to a blind or a deaf person. Behind stigmatization there are feelings and behaviours that other people experience that lead to negative attitudes. Awareness-raising strategies should look at these elements of stigmatization to better address the challenges of changing attitudes and building inclusive societies. 17. Stereotypes of persons with disabilities are commonly built upon their stigmatization. Stereotypes are a kind of social typing that do not consider variation within a group, telling a one-perspective story of the entire group based on a common trait, in this case the impairment of the person. These general assumptions are misleading, commonly untrue and have negative effects. Prejudice based on stigmatization and stereotyping usually results in exclusion and affects the psychological well-being of the person discriminated against. In the following paragraphs we consider some examples of these stereotypes. Common stereotypes against persons with disabilities 18. “Persons with disabilities are dangerous.” This presumption is usually associated with persons with intellectual disabilities and persons with psychosocial disabilities, and is often fuelled by media reports and reactions to gun violence that scapegoat such persons and call for measures to strengthen the enforcement of mental health laws, forced treatment and deprivation of liberty based on a perceived danger to the persons themselves or others. Such measures are contrary to the provisions of the Convention. In addition, the applicable 4 4 A/71/314, para. 31.