Should Paralympics and Olympics be incorporated into a single event?

The Paralympic Movement

Paralympics Games haven’t always been a separated event from the Olympics.

The first organised athletic event for disabled athletes took place on the day of the opening of the 1948 Olympics in London. It was called 1948 International Wheelchair Games organised by neurologist Sir Ludwig Guttmann. All the World War II veterans with spinal cord injuries at the Stoke Mandeville Hospital were involved in the sport competition. Sir Guttman’s competion aims to be equivalent to the Olympic Games, with the only difference they were for people with disabilities.

From that day the Paralympic movement has grown dramatically, and it was always hold in the same event until The Seoul Games, where the Paralympics were held directly after the Olympic Summer Games in the same host city, and using the same facilities. This was the first time the term Paralympic has been used. One year later the International Paralympic Committee (IPC) was established and started to act as an independent body with its own identity.

From there and today many things have been changed.

The interest and involvement in the Paralympics Games is growing up, and more people with disabilities are getting involved in sport at a competitive level. The number of athletes speeds up from 400 in 1960 Rome Games to over 3,900 athletes from 146 countries in 2008 Beijing and at 2012 London Paralympics they will be 7,000, which is impressive.

Looking at the future of the Paralympic games

One of the issues of debate around the event coming up in London in less than 2 weeks is if the Paralympics should be kept separated from the Olympics or combined in one single event?

Tying to answer to this question was the focus of the panel discussion organised by UCL (University College London)  at Senate House, London, on 13 August.

The “inclusive Games”

The conference kicked off with David Howe, a former Paralympian and Senior Lecturer in Anthropology of Sport at Loughborough University. He stressed on the social value of legacy for people with impairments for an “inclusive sport”.  Reaching that  means that people need to think with a different paradigm in their mind.  The term “inclusion” is not the result of the media focus on “inspirational athletes” (ex the exposure to the media of Oscar Pistorius during the London 2012 Olympics) neither a comparison to the Olympic movement. Being properly inclusive means having a different attitude and perception of disable sport, understanding the social justice with differences. “If the Paralympic Games follow in the shadow the Olympics the dream of “inclusion” will be harder to achieve”.

Money value

Mark Dyer, the Accessible Transport Manager at the London 2012 Olympic Delivery Authority, spoke from the work prospective and tell about the logistic problems implied in having just one event. 

The integration between the two Games raises a debate on independence and identity as well as the money issue. 

One of the crucial point the International Paralympics Committee faces is about funding and sponsorship.  

The Paralympics movement is growing very fast in term of athletes involved, from different countries and also the number of sports. London is one of the most advanced City for accessibility in sport. Having Olympics and Paralympics  combined in one event suggest a better organisation and improvement in accommodations and venues.

Legacy has not just a social value but also a money value.

The question is how it will be possible to level the differences between the Games, and if today is already the right time for a fusion or if it still is too early.

Paralympics tickets are more accessible and affordable. For this reason the interest in the Paralympics is picking up particularly among the young generation with the consequent effect of most people involved in sport and a big request of accessible sport venue. 

Obviously money can help to solve the problems, and here is where the political authority steps in.

The debate was re-launched by Prof Nora Groce, the Director of the Leonard Cheshire Disability and Inclusive Development Centre.

What is the decision to combine the Game?

The Media Challenge: Channel 4

Dan Brooke spoke for Channel 4, pointing out the mission for the channel’s coverage of the Paralympics. The Director of Communications and Marketing at Channel 4 stressed on the identity of Channel 4 as a state owned public service broadcaster looking at innovation, reflecting the culture’s diversity and discovering talents. 

Based on that, the decision to bid for the rights to cover 2012 London Paralympics was directed to change the perception of people with disabilities. 

Channel 4 reframes what the Paralympics are, discovering a new audience for disable sports.

They launch a bold marketing promotional campaign on Superhumans, and the public response to it was huge.

The changes in broadcasting the Paralympics involve the amount of hours of transmissions, which are 4 times much more as in the past, and the fact that half of their presenters and reporters have impairments. The channel spent half a million pounds to train that people and hopes that they will carry on with a career in the media.

Dan Brook’s answer to the controversial question if the Games should be combined is clear. Obviously this will a good decision to make based on the principle of equality. However the complexity in how combining the two events is still there.  

There is also the fear that unique identity of Paralympics, which is the strength of the Paralympics, will be lost.

The single event is the travel route, and the integration started in the individuals sports (ex.GB cycling), where athletes train together and use the same facilities, is very interesting indeed.

It is not more about special events happening every 4 years, it is about every day sport. One of the Channel 4’s future goals is to have weekly sport programmes, and it needs to be shown that there is an audience for disable sport. 

So we just have to wait to see which it will be the response to the 2012 Paralympics' coverage.

Suggestions and conclusions

The debated was very animated, also for the feedback and interest showed from public at the UCL debate.

People stressed on the involvement of children in disable sport to guarantee equality as a right issue. Children are influenced and inspired by the Games and  the media coverage. They like having idols and models. Seeing children signing up to the gym because they what to run as Mo Farah is just amazing and so positive for our next generation. 

About the Closing Ceremony someone suggest it will be better if it was the end of the Paralympic Games no at the end of the Olympics Games as they are same events separated by 2 weeks time.

Paralympic movement are growing fast and soon they will be part of a more "Inclusive Games".

One of the person from the public made a interesting state “ Olympics are there to show the perfect and ideal body; Paralympics accept the reality that all the people are not the same.