Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 91 Download : 35

Main Article Content

Abstract

Public understanding of disability in Banda Aceh continues to rely heavily on visible physical markers, resulting in limited recognition of invisible disabilities. This study examines public awareness, stigma, and institutional readiness using a qualitative sociological approach supported by descriptive survey data. A total of 50 respondents completed online/offline surveys, complemented by semi-structured interviews with policymakers, educators, and community actors, as well as policy document review and limited observations. Findings show a sharp awareness gap: while most respondents (94%) were familiar with disability in general, only 22% recognized that disabilities can be non-visible. Neurodiverse behaviours were frequently interpreted as issues of discipline, parenting, or spiritual disturbance rather than developmental differences, reflecting culturally rooted stigma. Institutional readiness was also low. Only 20% perceived public services as inclusive, and just 18% believed frontline staff understood invisible disabilities. Interviews revealed that although Qanun Aceh No. 2/2025 provides a legal foundation, it lacks operational guidelines and disability-disaggregated data, limiting effective implementation. Overall, the study identifies substantial gaps in public understanding, persistent stigma, and inadequate institutional preparedness. Improved disability literacy, clearer regulations, and strengthened cross-sector capacity are essential to advancing inclusion for individuals with invisible disabilities in Banda Aceh.

Keywords

Disability awareness Stigma Visible and Invisible Disabilities Sociological Policy Analysis

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Cut Nyak Salsabila, Niswah As Sayuthi, Athaya Rumaisha

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Salsabila, C. N., Sayuthi, N. A., & Rumaisha, A. (2025). Awareness and Stigma Toward Visible and Invisible Disabilities in Banda Aceh, Indonesia: A Sociological and Policy Analysis. Genesis Law and Social Sciences, 1(2), 55–64. https://doi.org/10.61975/glass.v1i2.102
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Ysasi NA, Becton AB, Chen RK. Stigmatizing effects of visible versus invisible disabilities. Journal of Disability Studies 2018;4:22.
  2. Santuzzi AM, Waltz PR, Finkelstein LM, Rupp DE. Invisible disabilities: Unique challenges for employees and organizations. Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2014;7:204–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/iops.12134.
  3. Fitzgerald MH. “ You Look So Well”: The Multiple Facets of Hidden Disabilities 2001.
  4. Braithwaite DO, Thompson TL. Handbook of communication and people with disabilities: Research and application. Routledge; 1999. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410603647.
  5. Nario-Redmond MR, Noel JG, Fern E. Redefining Disability, Re-imagining the Self: Disability Identification Predicts Self-esteem and Strategic Responses to Stigma. Self and Identity 2013;12:468–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2012.681118.
  6. Hendry G, Wilson C, Orr M, Scullion R. “I just stay in the house so I Don’t need to explain”: a qualitative investigation of persons with invisible disabilities. vol. 2. MDPI; 2022. https://doi.org/10.3390/disabilities2010012.
  7. Abualghaib O, Groce N, Simeu N, Carew MT, Mont D. Making visible the invisible: why disability-disaggregated data is vital to “leave no-one behind.” vol. 11. MDPI; 2019. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113091.
  8. Roman LG. Go figure! Public pedagogies, invisible impairments and the performative paradoxes of visibility as veracity. International Journal of Inclusive Education 2009;13:677–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110903041920.
  9. Ahmed M. Unequal access to health care facilities and its impact on achieving sustainable development goals: Bangladesh perspective. Jurnalul Practicilor Comunitare Pozitive 2022;22:120–44.
  10. Basnett BS, Myers R, Elias M. SDG 10: reduced inequalities–an environmental justice perspective on implications for forests and people. Sustainable Development Goals: Their Impacts on Forests and People Edited by Pia Katila, Carol J Pierce Colfer, Wil De Jong, Glenn Galloway, Pablo Pacheco and Georg Winkel Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2019:315–48.
  11. Bhandari MP. Social inequality as a global challenge: scenario, impacts, and consequences. Social Inequality as a Global Challenge, River Publishers; 2022, p. 1–25.
  12. Morin D, Rivard M, Crocker AG, Boursier CP, Caron J. Public attitudes towards intellectual disability: a multidimensional perspective. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research 2013;57:279–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/jir.12008.
  13. Verdonschot MML, De Witte LP, Reichrath E, Buntinx WHE, Curfs LMG. Impact of environmental factors on community participation of persons with an intellectual disability: a systematic review. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research 2009;53:54–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2788.2008.01128.x.
  14. QANUN ACEH NOMOR 2 TAHUN 2025 TENTANG PEMENUHAN HAK PENYANDANG DISABILITAS. n.d.
  15. Järvinen M, Mik-Meyer N. Qualitative analysis: Eight approaches for the social sciences. Sage; 2020.
  16. Oliveira RS, Collares TF, Smith KR, Collares TV, Seixas FK. The use of genes for performance enhancement: doping or therapy? vol. 44. SciELO Brasil; 2011. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-879X2011007500145.
  17. Knott E, Rao AH, Summers K, Teeger C. Interviews in the social sciences. vol. 2. Nature Publishing Group UK London; 2022. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43586-022-00150-6.
  18. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 2006;3:77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
  19. Earnshaw VA, Quinn DM. The Impact of Stigma in Healthcare on People Living with Chronic Illnesses. Journal of Health Psychology 2012;17:157–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105311414952.
  20. Edwards C, Love AMA, Cai RY, Tutton T, Gibbs V. Exploring autism-friendly initiatives in Australian airports: ‘A lot better than a lot of airports that I’ve experienced.’ Current Issues in Tourism 2024:1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2024.2422049.