Rehabilitation or Inclusion: Rethinking Our Approach to Marginalised Communities

For decades, interventions for marginalised populations—whether survivors of trafficking, persons with disabilities, those from historically oppressed castes, LGBTQ+ individuals, or people affected by conflict—have largely centred around rehabilitation. The term itself implies a return to an imagined "normal," often dictated by the very social structures that rejected them in the first place.

But what if the goal was not to restore, but to transform? What if we examined the issue through the lens of social inclusion and integration instead?

This shift is not merely semantic—it is deeply political and structural. It challenges us to move beyond a charity-based model of care towards an equity-based approach that acknowledges the right of marginalised individuals to belong, participate, and shape their own futures.

The Problem with the Rehabilitation Approach

The rehabilitation model assumes that marginalised populations need to be “fixed” before they can be accepted into society. It focuses on correcting behaviours, providing skill-building or vocational training, and sometimes even re-socialising individuals into the same structures that excluded them in the first place. While well-intentioned, this approach has several fundamental flaws:

1. It reinforces social hierarchies
2. It places the burden of change on the individual, not society
3. It often fails at long-term integration

Why Social Inclusion and Integration Matter

Instead of "rehabilitation," the conversation must shift to social inclusion and integration, which recognise that the problem is not the individual but the exclusionary structures they face.

Social inclusion is not just about accessing services but about belonging, participating, and thriving in a society that values diversity. This requires systemic change, including:

1. Changing Narratives: From Charity to Rights

• Marginalised individuals are not “beneficiaries” but citizens with rights.
• The focus must be on agency and autonomy, ensuring that they have control over their lives and decisions.
• Example: Instead of rescuing and placing survivors of trafficking in isolated homes, can we ensure their right to live in safe, open communities with economic opportunities?

2. Inclusive Economic Models

• Instead of vocational training programmes that reinforce gendered roles (e.g., sewing for women, carpentry for men), we need access to diverse, high-value economic opportunities.
• Governments and businesses must create affirmative hiring policies to bring marginalised individuals into mainstream workspaces.
• Example: Hiring policies in corporations and government schemes that mandate hiring survivors of trafficking, Dalit communities, transgender persons, and people with disabilities.

3. Community-Led Integration

• Inclusion must happen within communities, not just in institutions.
• Working with local leaders, faith-based organisations, schools, and families is critical in shifting social attitudes.
• Example: Social reintegration programmes that facilitate dialogues between survivors and their families/communities rather than forcing reunification.

4. Policy and Structural Changes

• Rehabilitation models tend to work in isolation, while inclusion requires cross-sectoral collaboration in education, housing, employment, and health.
• Example: Instead of separate housing for marginalised groups, integrated housing policies that create mixed-income, mixed-identity neighbourhoods.

5. Mental Health and Psychosocial Wellbeing as Central

• Exclusion is not just physical, but deeply psychological.
• Healing must be seen as a collective process, rather than solely an individual journey.
• Example: Community therapy models where survivors support each other, shifting away from institutionalised mental health services.

Reimagining Social Belonging

If we truly believe in justice and dignity, then rehabilitation cannot be the final goal. A world that continues to “rehabilitate” rather than integrate is one that refuses to fundamentally change.

The real challenge is not in helping marginalised individuals adapt—it is in making society inclusive enough to never exclude them in the first place.

Instead of bringing people “back” into society, can we create a society where no one is ever pushed out?

That is the future we must build.

Final Thoughts

Sanjog’s work and advocacy must continue leading this paradigm shift—from charity to equity, from rehabilitation to inclusion, from exclusion to belonging.