women with disabilities being refused in priority lanes, or made to justify and repeatedly explain their disability in public. As shared by a deaf transwoman in Cebu, “In the hospital, there is a long line for patients. I experienced unfair treatment because they treated me as if I do not have a disability. They wanted me to fall in line because they were not aware that I am a deaf and they could not understand me.” There is also confusion in defining what constitutes chronic illness, resulting in uneven provision of benefits in LGUs. In several of the Inquiry sites, queries were raised as to what constitutes chronic illness and the requirements to prove such. This confusion not only impacts recognition of disability, it also affects access to medications. One woman with psychosocial illness complained, “Lagi ko ‘tong sinasabi na milyon ang nageexpire na gamot. Libre yung mga gamot na yun sa mga regular na sakit pero walang gamot para sa psychosocial illness. Libre sa may mga chronic illness.” (“I always say this, there are millions of expired medicines. They are free for regular illnesses, but there are no (free) medicines for psychosocial illnesses. Medicines are free for those with chronic illnesses.”) Accounts from women with disabilities also highlight how the absence of sign language interpreters and the lack of disability and gender sensitivity training impact access to justice. In one account, a parent leader from Kaisahan ng Nag-Aaruga at may Kapansanan (KAINAKAP) disclosed that barangay peace and security officers (barangay tanods) have no training in handling PWDs, especially those with psychosocial disabilities. “Ang mga barangay tanod, paano sila mag-aapproach? Siyempre kung minsan nagsisisigaw na [yung biktima], hindi nila alam na may disability na pala, may impairment na pala, hindi nila alam na may ADHD. At may ilang PWD member po na biktima ng pangaabuso, ng rape, na hindi makapag-express kaya ang magulang wala na ring magawa. At kung minsan ang nangyayari pa ay tao ng barangay o malakas kay Chairman [ang perpetrator].” (“The barangay tanods, how they will approach the victim if she is shouting, if they don’t know that she has a disability, if they don’t know that she has ADHD. A few of our members are victims of abuse, of rape, but they cannot express themselves so the parents can’t do anything. Sometimes, the perpetrators are from the barangay or someone who is in favor with the Chairman.”) In a public hearing in NCR, Likhaan underscored the continuing gap in the provision of RH information and services, especially for women with disabilities. Likhaan stressed the importance of providing appropriate family planning methods for different women with different disabilities. However, the Inquiry revealed that this is not practiced. The fact-finding mission showed that health centers were not particular with the RH information being provided to women with disabilities (i.e. their options with regard to family planning methods to use, and commodities available that suit their needs. For instance, an FGD participant with a physical impairment had two unplanned pregnancies because she was not informed that there was an option to replace IUDs once removed. Another woman with disability had to use pills (procured from the health center) that made her drowsy due to lack of awareness of other types of pills. 13