As a Paralympian and disability rights advocate, I have often been asked about the idea of merging the Paralympics and the Olympics. On the surface, merging the Olympics and Paralympics might seem to promote the unity and equality that I support. People are often surprised when I say that the Olympics should be held separately. Here are the reasons why I think the Olympics and Paralympics should be held separately:
The idea of inclusion manifests differently for different people, influenced by their place of origin and cultural background. In some societies, inclusion is viewed through the lens of universal access and rights, with adjustments made to equally integrate everyone into the mainstream environment. However, inclusion does not necessarily equate to equality, as it often involves recognizing and celebrating differences rather than trying to make everyone “the same.”
The Paralympic Games and parasports have been powerful catalysts in transforming perceptions of disability by highlighting the extraordinary abilities of athletes with disabilities. Traditionally, disability has often been viewed through the lens of limitation and dependency. Instead, the Paralympics offer a transformative perspective by showcasing the resilience, determination and elite athletic ability of its participants. Through high-level competition and spectacular feats of strength and skill, these athletes challenge stereotypes and redefine what is possible. Each Paralympic athlete has overcome significant challenges to compete at the highest level in their respective sports.
Still, we cannot ignore the fundamental differences between athletes with and without disabilities. For example, if a disabled basketball player wants to play for his country, his only option is wheelchair basketball. The rules are slightly different to accommodate the technical demands on the wheelchair court, but of course the skill required of a para-athlete is second to none: passing and shooting while maneuvering a wheelchair at high speed is something athletes have spent years honing.
At the Tokyo Paralympics, the best time for a male swimmer in the 100m freestyle was 50.64 seconds, which was phenomenally fast, but the best time for the men’s 100m freestyle at the Olympics was 49th. If the Olympics were truly inclusive and everyone competed side by side, Paralympic swimmers would have a hard time qualifying and basketball would be impossible. Wheelchair and non-wheelchair swimmers can’t be on the court together. It’s too dangerous.
So what if we combined the Olympics and Paralympics into one very large event?
While this may seem like a step toward a more inclusive approach, it could potentially undermine the unique needs and outcomes of athletes with disabilities.
Consider the infrastructure needed for 26,000 accommodation beds and transport services to accommodate roughly the same number of people, including 2,000 in wheelchairs. Unless the number of facilities, including two Olympic stadiums and a swimming pool, is doubled, the duration of the Olympics would have to be extended to a month of nonstop events. Decisions will certainly have to be made about shortening the event schedule, but who will decide which sports and sporting events to keep or cancel?
Moreover, while the Olympics are already a massive, high-profile sporting event that requires extensive media coverage, sponsorship and logistical support, the Paralympics, despite their growing reputation, often struggle to secure the same level of visibility and resources. There is a real risk that media coverage of Paralympic athletes will be drowned out by the already massive flow of information generated by Olympic news coverage.
Financially, Paralympic sports already struggle for funding and recognition compared to Olympic sports. Merger could exacerbate this disparity as sponsor and media attention may be diverted to the larger, more established Olympic sports. In my opinion, this will hinder the growth and development of Paralympic sports and its athletes who should have their own spotlight. It will further dilute the focused attention and specialized support that athletes with disabilities need, giving them less of an outlet to showcase their unique talents and experiences.
It is also important to remember that the word “Paralympics” comes from the Greek preposition “para” (adjacent, side by side) and the word “Olympics.” The meaning indicates that the Paralympics are parallel games to the Olympics, with the two athletics existing side by side.
In 2001, a formal agreement was signed between the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the International Paralympic Committee (IPC) to ensure that cities that host the Olympic Games will also host the Paralympic Games. The “one bid, one city” agreement safeguards the organisation of the Paralympic Games, meaning that the organising committees and financial guarantees of both are fully integrated for the Paralympic Games, and that the same venues, facilities and infrastructure are used.
The Paralympic Games are not just a celebration of sporting excellence, but a profound showcase of the capabilities and contributions of people with disabilities. The Paralympic Games are a testament to the power of diversity and human achievement in the face of adversity, and they play a vital role in breaking down barriers and changing public perceptions – exactly what is needed to foster a more inclusive world.
These are two very different events, with different histories and representing different movements – let’s honour Paralympic athletes in their respective capacities, celebrate their contributions to sport and society and ensure their voices are heard loud and clear on the world stage.