Lessons on the Protection of Non-Visible Disabilities within the US Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

Published: Oct 22, 2025

Country: Uganda

Derrick Mpagi is a 2025 Fellow in the Professional Fellows Program on Inclusive Civic Engagement. This program is sponsored by the US Department of State’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and is administered by the Institute for Community Inclusion (ICI) at the University of Massachusetts Boston in partnership with the African Disability Forum (ADF). The following blog post was written by guest author Derrick.

Four people seated on a bench inside an office building taking a group selfie together. — Figure 1: Fall 2025 Professional Fellows Maria Makau (left), Derrick Mpagi (third from left), his assistant, Dawn Mpagi (second from left), and Samantha Fein, Community Organizer at the Disability Policy Consortium (DPC).

During my Professional Fellows Program (PFP) fellowship, I had the opportunity to participate in the Massachusetts State House hearing on preventing overdose deaths and increasing access to treatment, with the support of my host site, the Disability Policy Consortium (DPC) and my host mentor Samantha Fein (Figure 1). This hearing introduced me to diverse opinions from the citizens of Massachusetts about the need to establish Overdose Prevention Centers (OPCs), and how they can lead to reduced overdose deaths in the state of Massachusetts.

As a Ugandan advocate for the rights of people with non-visible disabilities, particularly people with lupus, what stood out the most for me during these hearings was the fact that the citizens of Massachusetts regarded addiction as a non-visible disability. For example, one speaker, during the hearing, shared her opinion on the fact that people who are addicted to illegal drugs cannot stop themselves from using illegal, addictive, and death-causing drugs without support from the community, just like COVID patients could not stop themselves from contracting the virus during the pandemic. She further added that criminalizing illegal drug addicts has not and does not address the problem, because, once the addict is released from prison, they continue using illegal drugs since their disability has not been addressed — it has been simply suppressed by denying them access to illegal drugs through detention. This is a challenge that no other person has to endure since they have the capacity to choose what they may take.

Her statement made me think of the ADA, and how it protects diverse people with disabilities, including deaf people who also have a non-visible disability. Through its provisions, the ADA, does not dictate what disabilities are, but uses challenges that people with disabilities face to be inclusive of all people with disabilities. For example, the ADA, through its detailed list of challenges people with disabilities may face, it not only protects people with physical, mental and environmental disabilities, but also people with invisible disabilities like deafness, Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE)/Lupus, and drug/alcohol addictions, among others.

In contrast, the Ugandan policies on the definition of disability in the country dictate what a disability is: physical, mental, and environmental. The Ugandan government’s definition of disability is narrow and dictative, and excludes deaf people, people with lupus, and people with other non-visible disabilities that continue to be discovered by science. This definition of disability was developed by the Ugandan government, through its legislative arm (The parliament of Uganda) and executive arm (Ministry responsible for persons with disabilities). It clearly shows that the development of national disability policies were born without the inclusion or participation of all people with disabilities..

In conclusion, laws or policies that dictate to people with disabilities what a disability is always fall short in protecting their rights. We can address these challenges through hearings about policies that a government intends to pass into law, just as I witnessed at the Massachusetts State House. Policy hearings give people with disabilities a platform to share their concerns about a policy that a legislature intends to pass, but also further gives people with disabilities (visible and non-visible) the opportunity to suggest more inclusive alternatives.