Some disabilities are more deserving: The case of assistive technology policies in the US and Türkiye

Abstract

Welfare states around the world generously cover vital but very expensive assistive technology like artificial limbs for disabled veterans, whereas only a fraction of these costs is covered for disabled civilians. These stark disparities in social rights among veterans and civilians categorically define disability policies across different countries. How and why are these policies similar across different cases? I address reasons for surprisingly similar outcomes by comparing the structure of disability policies in the US and Türkiye in the post-1990s. Employing a Most Different System Design, I rely on data sources like official statistics, legislative documents, and congressional and parliamentary debates. The US and Türkiye have dissimilar institutional features many of which may potentially be prime candidates for explaining the inegalitarian outcome of disability policies. I argue that patriotism, an informal rule shaping key state actors’ behavior, effectively structures who gets what, when, and how in disability policies by (i) assigning a higher normative status to disabled veterans and (ii) shaping how key policy actors perceive conditions of deserving disabilities in both countries. This results in inegalitarian disability policy outcomes despite the formal rule of human rights dictating to treat all people with disabilities equally.