The sexuality of disabled people is a taboo subject in disability services, health care and in society as a whole. Additionally, physical inaccessibility, lack of social policy and failure by professionals to recognise the needs of disabled people to be supported in their sexual expression can lead to unmet needs, misconduct and reproduction of desexualising stereotypes. The aim of this study was to analyse the conditions, implications and consequences of claims for sexual facilitation on a policy level in three countries: The UK, The Netherlands and the state of New South Wales in Australia. Disabled people have vastly different possibilities for sexual recognition and expression in different policy contexts. Adopting a mixed-method design, including critical policy analysis, interviews, and workshops, with a comparative case study approach allowed for qualitative insights into the policy processes as well as their consequences in practice. The interplay between policy, culture and practice is evident. The case studies show that certain aspects are visible in all or several contexts, while others are specific to each case.
In the UK, austerity has led the major disability organizations to focus their attention on countering further cutbacks and fighting for their rights to basic services, and sexuality is not prioritised. Among the small organisations working specifically with sexuality, funding and collaboration is lacking. In New South Wales, such collaboration between key stakeholders led to both policy and practice that acknowledges and enables sexual support. However, the current implementation of a new national disability service system (NDIS) posits a possible danger to keeping the NSW-specific policies and practices. In the Netherlands, the newly ratified CRPD along with the first national disability policy promised hope for including sexual rights on the agenda among the key stakeholders, however, this has not been realised. Although there are 'sex care' providers, they are not publicly funded and local councils can choose whether or not to allow benefits to be used for such expenses. Thus, the comparison shows that even though there are international conventions on disability rights and sexual rights, how they are understood and then implemented varies considerably – both with regards to policies and civil society organisations.
A central aim of the study was also to develop good practices together with local disability rights organisations in order for research results to not only contribute to theoretical understandings of sexuality and disability, but also to developments in policy and practice, based on expert knowledge and experience. The workshops in the different countries provided relevant organisations with the opportunity to meet and discuss possible strategies, as well as to build stronger networks of stakeholders, which is central in policy processes and advocacy. The groups furthermore benefited from learning about policies, resources and practices from other contexts which they could then adapt to their own development work.
As concerns theoretical developments, the concept of 'sexual citizenship' has been developed further to include disability and accessibility perspectives, specifically in relation to sexual support and to disabled people's struggles to be recognised as sexual in the first place. An intersectional perspective reveals that there are differences in opportunities and conceptualisations based on gender, age and socioeconomic status.
In conclusion, the project has furthered our knowledge about disabled people's contextually contingent opportunities for sexual support as they relate to culture and politics. The history of the disabled people's movement, the role of sexual rights movements and how disability and sexuality respectively are conceptualised are central dimensions to understanding each case study.
