Disabilities Increase as We Get Older

![](https://dequeuniversity.com/assets/images/cpacc/wheelchairElderly.png)Older people are more likely to have disabilities. Estimates range from about 30% to 60% of older populations, compared to 10%-20% for the population as a whole. Often, we acquire multiple disabilities as a natural part of the aging process. Many of us lose our sight, our hearing, our mobility, and/or our cognition. The combination of multiple disabilities can be challenging for the individuals, which underscores the importance of ensuring accessibility is built into the environment as much as possible. Countries with large aging populations are likely to have a greater proportion of people with disabilities, all other things being equal. (Factors that could change this expected data trend would be poverty and war, which often cause disabilities in younger populations.) Looking ahead in this digital age, adults who have spent much of their lives using digital technologies will expect to be able to continue using digital technologies even after acquiring disabilities. The market for accessible digital technologies is expected to increase as more technologically-savvy users age and acquire disabilities.

Data Details for Aging and Disabilities

In countries with life expectancies over 70 years, individuals spend on average about 8 years, or 11.5 per cent of their life span, living with disabilities. Source: Website: United Nations; Domain: http://www.un.org/ ![opens in a new window](http://www.un.org/) (original link no longer available) Disability of Persons 65+ Worldwide
Age Percentage with Disability
Any Age 10%
70+ 20%
85+ 50%
Source: Website: University at Buffalo - Department of Rehabilitation Science; Domain: https://publichealth.buffalo.edu/ ![opens in a new window](https://publichealth.buffalo.edu/) (original link no longer available) References: The World Health Organization (2003; 2006) Disability by Age (New Zealand, 2013)
Age Range Percentage with Disability
Children under 15 years 11%
Adults under 65 21%
65 or over 59%

Sources

U.S. Population Aged 65 and Over by Number of Disabilities and Age: 2008−2012
Age None One Two Three or More
65 and over 61.3% 15.9% 8.0% 14.7%
65 to 74 73.6% 13.9% 5.5% 7.0%
75 to 84 55.0% 18.7% 9.8% 16.5%
85 and over 27.5% 17.1% 13.9% 41.5%

Source: Website: United States Census Bureau. Domain: https://www.census.gov/

Notes: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 5-year estimates, 2008−2012.

U.S. Population Aged 65 and Over with a Disability by Type of Disability, Age, and Sex: 2008–2012 Source: Website: United States Census Bureau. Domain: https://www.census.gov/ Notes: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 5-year estimates, 2008–2012. In the U.S. Census Bureau 2014 report, Americans aged 85 and older represented 13.6 percent of the total older population (ages 65 and up) and accounted for 25.4 percent of those with a disability.

Source: Website: United States Census Bureau. Domain: https://www.census.gov/

Reference: He, Wan and Luke J. Larsen, U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey Reports, ACS-29, Older Americans With a Disability: 2008 – 2012, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 2014.

Percentage of Persons 65+ with a Disability (United States, 2013)

Type of Disability Total Age 65 to 74 Age 75 to 84 Age 85 and Over Male Female
Vision 19.2% 16.5% 18.2% 24.9% 17.6% 20.4%
Hearing 40.4% 34.9% 40.6% 48.1% 52.0% 32.3%
Cognitive 28.8% 22.6% 28.0% 39.1% 25.9% 30.8%
Ambulatory 66.5% 63.6% 65.2% 72.8% 57.1% 73.1%
Self-Care 28.4% 20.2% 26.9% 42.4% 23.3% 31.9%
Independent Living 47.8% 34.0% 47.2% 68.7% 37.0% 55.4%
Type of Disability Percentage
Independent Living 15%
Self-Care 9%
Ambulatory 23%
Cognitive 9%
Vision 7%
Hearing 15%
Any Disability 36%

Website: Administration for Community Living !opens in a new window (original link no longer available)

    • U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey.
    • Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey.

Robust

Defining Robustness

Robustness is about ensuring compatibility with a broad range of user agents, including assistive technologies.

Different User Agents

Different user agents (browsers and other web devices) parse web content differently. The differences are apparent across platforms (Windows, Mac, iOS, Android, Linux, etc.), and even across different versions of the same browser. For example, Internet Explorer 8 parses HTML quite differently from Internet Explorer 11, in part because of bug fixes and features added, and in part because of advances in support for newer web specifications, such as HTML 5 and CSS 3. Different versions of screen readers also handle content differently, with newer versions featuring better support for newer technologies such as ARIA. It would be impossible to support all possible combinations of all user agents. There are too many to take into account, and some of them simply aren't robust enough themselves to handle the kinds of things that are necessary for ideal accessibility. You'll have to draw a line in the sand somewhere and say that you'll support Internet Explorer only back to version X, or that you won't support browser Y because its user base is so small and/or because the browser doesn't have a feature set that is rich enough.

Use Standard Markup

One of the best ways to increase the likelihood of robust markup and code across user agents is to use standard markup. To the extent possible, the content should be validated using appropriate validators. You can validate the HTML (see the W3C HTML validator), CSS (see the W3C CSS validator), JavaScript (you can use a tool such as Firebug to inspect the code, or an online tool such as JSLint), and other aspects of the markup. Valid markup doesn't guarantee accessibility. And in fact, valid markup is not always necessary for accessibility; it is not a one-to-one relationship between validity and accessibility or robustness. Even so, valid code definitely helps eliminate some of the issues that can lead to problems in different user agents, making your job easier when it comes to narrowing down the causes of potential accessibility problems.

Use ARIA (or other means) to Indicate the Name, Role, and Value of Interactive Components

In the old days of the web, web pages were basically static. They did not have much capability for interaction. These days, most major web sites are highly dynamic, often using custom widgets and scripts to create opportunities for interaction and dynamic display of information. This high level of interactivity demands careful attention to how objects are marked up. Screen reader users need to know that an item is expandable and whether it is currently expanded or collapsed (`aria-expanded="true"` or `aria-expanded="false"`). They need to know if a tab is selected or not (`aria-selected="true"` or `aria-selected="false"`). It's not enough to set these properties once on a page. These properties need to be updated dynamically using JavaScript when their state changes. ARIA ("Accessible Rich Internet Applications") provides a wealth of capabilities for dynamic content that were very difficult or impossible to achieve before. Learn ARIA and apply it.

See Also:

Provide Multiple Means of Representation

We learned that we collect information through the recognition networks in the brain, but collecting that information depends on how that information is presented to us as learners. Learners are diverse. There are learners who may have different cultural backgrounds, learners who may be visually or hearing impaired, and learners who may have cognitive disabilities. Not everyone perceives information the same way, so it is critical that instruction is delivered in various, multiple formats.

Guidelines for Multiple Means of Representation

1: Provide Options for Perception

Information is perceived through the senses, particularly through sight, sound, and touch. If instructional information is not presented in a way a learner perceives information, it will be extremely difficult for the learner to grasp the knowledge. Preventing imperceptibility involves presenting the same kind of information in different formats, particularly in formats students can customize based on their specific needs. When options for learners are built into instructional materials, it maximizes a teacher's chances of reaching a greater number of students.

2: Provide Options for Language, Mathematics Expressions, and Symbols

Different representations of content should be presented to learners to not only increase accessibility, but to enhance comprehension. There are instances where learners may not know or understand what a graphic or symbol may be communicating to them, or what a mathematical equation may be asking of them. This could be due to a specific disability or it could be due to differing cultural backgrounds. In any case, instructors should provide supplemental materials that increase understandability.

3: Provide Options for Comprehension

The key to education is to ensure learners are able to use and apply knowledge they consume. Enabling students to link new information to what they have previously learned and incorporating active learning strategies may increase a student’s capacity to process information. Students are diverse in how they process information, so instructors must include variable options for learners to comprehend information.

Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0

    • Perceivable: More than one sense
    • Operable: Variety of input methods
    • Understandable: logical and predictable
    • Robust: compatible across platforms and assistive technologies

Principles of Universal Design

1) Equitable use: for people all different abilities 2) Flexibility in use: configurable to accomodate needs 3) Simple intuitive: easy to understand for everybody 4) Perceptible information: communicates all necessary information for everybody 5) Tolerance for error: minimizes hazards, accidents, unintended actions 6) Low physical effort: can be used efficiently, comfortably, with minimal fatigue 7) Size and space for approach and use: shouldn't restrict anyone by size or space