Findings from both country confirmed that the systems in both countries are viewed as corrupt, unjust, and that it fails to provide for those that need assistance the most. What was found in both countries was a failure to identify and address inequalities that lie at the intersections. State policies will provide assistance to persons with disabilities. However, as one moves away from the capitals, it seems that the accessibility decreases. Thus, living in a rural area poses additional obstacles for these persons. In addition, in the case of BiH, there is a staggering difference in the amounts of funds provided by social assistance among the three entities. Additional difference highlighted in the case of BiH is in relation to persons who acquired disability during the war and as war veterans and civilians, and all others.
In both countries persons report burdening, lengthy and complex procedures for acquiring and keeping the social assistance funds. In addition, persons who are either homeless or who have no income whatsoever, but who do not receive social assistance or whose assistance has been discontinued were identified. Neither special services, nor care is extended to persons with disabilities. Children, especially female children seem to be off the State’s radar. No care is taken over their position, the conditions in which they mature, no effort is made to assist parents in their child-rearing activities. Moreover, in some of the cases parents or caretakers went to incredible lengths to protect and bring up their children; yet, not only are they not assisted by the State, but they face additional obstacles.
A predominant single axis approach was identified. In Macedonia there seems to be a stronger equality and non-discrimination legal and policy framework. Its comprehensive equality law includes a provision on multiple discrimination, declaring it an outlawed grave form of discrimination. This is not the case in BiH where, although the draft-law contained such a provision, it was later taken out from the text and the law was adopted without outlawing multiple discrimination. In both countries the social protection laws fail to outlaw intersectional discrimination but also multiple discrimination – in more general terms. On grounds of this, a joint recommendation for both countries is that a study needs to be conducted on possibilities for introducing intersectionality to policy making which would include lessons learned from other national process with well assessed potential for policy transplants’ success or failure.
