The Paralympics are supposed to be fair and inclusive, but often fail to be

As a Paralympic athlete, I have experienced firsthand how an outdated system of disability classification benefits some and undermines others.

The Summer Paralympic Games in Paris are now coming to a close. Over the past 10 days, more than 1,000 athletes with disabilities competed in 164 different disciplines. Inspiring stories about overcoming adversity and celebrating diversity filled sports pages covering the event.

Indeed, the Paralympics, which are held every four years, promise athletes with disabilities a platform where dedication and skill, not their physical conditions, define their potential for victory. They are supposed to guarantee fairness and inclusivity.

Yet, when I naively embarked on my journey as a Paralympic athlete, I was shocked to find a system that often accentuates rather than diminishes disabilities. While the International Paralympic Committee (IPC) touts advancements in athlete inclusion and competitive integrity, many athletes face a different reality.

When the Paralympics started in 1960, they focused on catering mainly to World War II veterans with specific injuries. Competitions were organised by amputation type or wheelchair use. These categories are still largely in use 70 years later, with athletes being grouped based on their impairments.

The goal is to create a level playing field by ensuring that athletes compete against others with similar ability levels. However, this classification system does not accommodate the wide spectrum of disabilities now present in the games.

I personally experienced the system’s inadequacies when officials, unable to classify my unique set of impairments, arbitrarily placed me in a category originally intended for athletes with below-knee amputations,