Ally Burnout: Views of Disability Studies Students

Abstract

Disabled people/people with disabilities (DP/PWDs) need allies in general and subject matter specific allies in particular given the many problems they face in their daily lives, as it is, for example, evident in the language of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Numerous actions are required from allies of, for example, DP/PWDs and other marginalized groups. Authentic allies are often expected to take on activist roles, yet activism carries the risk of activist burnout, which in turn places allies at risk of ally burnout. Despite this, ally burnout is rarely discussed in the literature, and, to date, there are no studies that specifically examined ally burnout in the context of allyship to and by DP/PWDs. The aim of this study was to deepen our understanding of the factors and topics that heighten the risk of ally burnout, including both non-disabled individuals acting as allies to DP/PWDs and DP/PWDs acting as allies to others. In this study, our participants included eighty-seven critical disability studies students. Critical disability studies students were chosen because they see themselves as allies of DP/PWDs and want to make a positive difference in the lives of DP/PWDs, including disabled students. We used an online survey using the Qualtrics platform as our tool to obtain the data. Our participants identified many factors that can lead to ally burnout and indicated many actions needed to decrease the danger of ally burnout of non-disabled people being allies of DP/PWDs and DP/PWDs being allies of others.

1. Introduction

Disabled people/people with disability¹ (DP/PWDs) need allies, both amongst other DP/PWDs, as well as non-disabled individuals, considering the many challenges they encounter in their daily lives [1,2,3,4,5]. There are many expectations as to the actions an ally ought to take, including engaging in continuous self-education and activism [6]. However, an increasing number of studies flag the danger of activist burnout [7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16]. If being an ally requires activism, then this poses a risk of activist burnout, and by extension, ally burnout [6]. Despite these concerns, ally burnout in general and in the context of being an ally of DP/PWDs remains an unexplored topic in the academic literature [6,7].

The aim of our study was to better understand the issue of ally burnout of non-disabled people being allies of DP/PWDs and DP/PWDs being allies of other DP/PWDs.

To explore this, we asked five main research questions.

• Who can be an ally of DP/PWDs?
• What does it involve being an ally of DP/PWDs?
• Do you think that non-disabled allies of DP/PWDs could be in danger of burnout, and if yes, why?
• Which disability-related activism topics do you think contain a particularly high danger of leading to burnout of allies of DP/PWDs?
• Do you think that DP/PWDs of one disability group that act as allies of other DP/PWDs are in danger of ally burnout, and if yes, why?

For this initial study, we focused on critical disability studies students as participants. Disability studies courses are based on furthering social justice for disabled people [17] and enhancing the lived reality of disabled people in all their facets [18]. Disability studies students are characterized as seeing themselves currently or in the future as allies of DP/PWDs [19,20], as engaging with the social problems DP/PWDs face in order to make a positive difference in the lives of DP/PWDs [21], and as aiming to raise awareness about the problematic lived reality of DP/PWDs [22].

Being Allies of DP/PWDs and the Danger of Ally Burnout

If we focus on the many problems DP/PWDs face in their daily lives, flagged in the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities [1], the 2018 and 2025 Flagship Report on Disability and Development: Realization of the Sustainable Development Goals by, for, and with Persons with Disabilities [2,3], and the Global Report on Health Equity for Persons with Disabilities [4], all of the problems highlighted need continuous activism by DP/PWDs to decrease existing problems and prevent future problems. The vast numbers of systemic and ad hoc problems DP/PWDs face and the various barriers DP/PWDs face in their advocacy work offline and online [23,24,25], and the sense that they are not heard (“Nothing about us without us”) [26,27,28,29,30,31], all suggest they cannot by themselves deal with all the issues, whereby the ability to be an activist is also different depending on one’s lived reality and one’s body/mind characteristic. As such, DP/PWDs need allies from the general public but also subject matter experts on any given problem. One example of subject matter allies needed is in relation to the social and societal reality triggered by advancements in science and technology. Societal consequences of artificial intelligence and quantum technologies are the most recent developments discussed in academia and the public domain, and it is noted that both technologies pose various challenges for society at large and disabled people DP/PWDs [32,33]. Science and technology governance discussions often look at potential problems that might arise, for example, under the framing of anticipatory governance [34]. Alone, DP/PWDs are not able to learn about all issues and impacts in a timely fashion to be able to advocate on a given topic before the problem is institutionalized [5]. As such, DP/PWDs need subject matter allies within the discussions of emerging topics that recognize, enact, and support DP/PWDs to enter these discussions and bring forth their needs to the table.

Many expectations are attached to allyship more broadly, including supporting social change [35], engaging in lifelong learning [36,37], not being defined by the ally [36], using one’s privilege responsibly [36,38], recognizing privilege in general [35,37], amplifying marginalized voices [36,37,38,39,40,41], considering the power in language [39], understanding one’s positionality [35,39], conducting research [38,39,40], and taking action [38,39,40,42]. Being an ally of DP/PWDs is described with many of the same characteristics [6], with some specific to the case of DP/PWDs including the following: to consider the power in language [43,44], to develop a nuanced perspective on intersectional ableism and allyship [41,43], to bring internalized ableism and privilege to light [41,43], to be aware of ability privileges [45], to dismantle ableism [43], to challenge ableist practices [43], and to understand the concept of vulnerability [46].

Intersectionality is flagged as another key aspect of allyship with the term, “intersectional allyship” used [43,47,48]. Highlighting the importance of intersectionality of different forms of oppression, scholars argue that the systemic disablism experienced by DP/PWDs is “exacerbated by sexism, racism, non-citizenship status, and/or fatphobia (weight shaming)” [49] (p. 8). Intersectionality is also a core pillar of disability justice frameworks [43,50,51,52,53]. A tool that uses forty statements found in the literature describing disability allyship has been generated for potential and existing disability allies (Disability Allyship Q-Sort), to facilitate self-reflection on what it means to be an ally of DP/PWDs [54]. For this study, it is important to understand that DP/PWDs are not a homogenous group [43,46]. DP/PWDs differ in their body/mind characteristics that put them into the category of DP/PWDs but also in where they see the disablement originating (the body, the environment, or both), and in their lived realities [50].

Given that allies ought to be activists they are in danger of activist burnout.

“Activist burnout has been defined as when long-term activism-related stressors deteriorate activists’ physical or emotional health or sense of connectedness to their movements, impacting their effectiveness or abilities to remain engaged” and “Making matters worse, burnout begets burnout, as movement work is taken up by fewer people, who begin to burn out, engage less effectively, and take out their hopelessness on fellow activists” [9] (p. 364).

Many social factors contributing to activist burnout have been described. To quote:

“Causes of activist burnout mentioned include issues internal and external to the activist and problems within and between movements [6,55,56]. Examples of the causes of activist burnout include being different from the norm [6,55,56,57]; unreasonable expectations [56]; working too much [56]; working on issues around identity [56,57]; working outside the system [57]; the persistence of sexism, racism, and other oppressions [6]; emotional labour [6]; the way one’s lived experience outside the activism impacts the activism [6]; and treatment of activists in organizations [6]” cited from [7] (p. 3).

Disabled activists experience these and many other unique stressors related to being activists that can lead to burnout [7]. Furthermore, it is argued that

“Activist burnout theory to date has failed to account for how causes of burnout differ for people who are subject to racism, sexism, and other oppressions within movements. It also has failed to account for how the overall grind of these oppressions experienced in the everyday lives of marginalized-identity activists inside and outside their activism inform their susceptibility to burnout” [9] (p. 376).

Various gaps are identified within the literature. A recent scoping review of the existing literature did not find any source that covered activist burnout of DP/PWDs [7]. Furthermore, another recent scoping review covering allyship and DP/PWDs [6] identified no sources that used the term “ally burnout”, although in [6] two sources were identified to have used the term “burnout” [43,46] and four articles that mentioned challenges for allies in relation to disabled people, namely “seeing DP/PWD as a homogenous [43,46], the danger of internalizing ableism [43], the hierarchy among oppressed groups [46], the “appropriation of the voice” of the oppressed [58] (p. 8), and the danger of competing narratives that are of use to the ally organization and its disabled [59]” in [6] (p. 25) (we made the citations live so the reference numbers are different in the original quote).

In summary, the mutual support amongst DP/PWDs and allyship from non-disabled individuals is essential in addressing the numerous problems that DP/PWDs face in their daily lives [1,2,3,4,5]. The essential role of activism for allies places them in danger of activist burnout [7,24], and with that ally burnout [6,7]. We found few studies that looked at ally burnout and none that covered ally burnout in relation to DP/PWDs. To fill the gap, we asked the views of critical disability studies students, a group of individuals that see themselves as allies of DP/PWDs, about the factors that lead to ally burnout of DP/PWDs being allies of others and non-disabled people being allies of DP/PWDs.

2. Method

2.1. Study Design

This study was conducted in accordance with the ethics approval granted by the Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board of the University of Calgary; Approval number REB 23-0605, 22 July 2023. It examines the perspectives of first-year undergraduate critical disability studies students from one Canadian university on the topic of allyship and ally burnout experienced by non-disabled allies of DP/PWDs and disabled allies of others. Our study can be classified as an online qualitative survey [60], as open-ended questions were used to obtain the main data for this study, which focused on the views of participants on the social factors that lead to the danger of ally burnout. The online qualitative survey was distributed via the Canadian university’s Qualtrics online platform.

2.2. Theoretical Framework

Our research is primarily guided by the following theoretical lens related to DP/PWDs and allyship. Given the participants we focus on, and our assumption that allies of DP/PWDs aim to make the social situation of DP/PWDs better, we interpret our findings through the field [18,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68] and methodology [69] of critical/disability studies, which investigates the social, lived experience of DP/PWDs, and disablism, the systemic discrimination based on not measuring up to irrelevant ability norms [70]. Covering the Global South, in one study it is stated:

“Critical disability studies (CDS), or critical disability theory (CDT)², includes interdisciplinary approaches to analyze disability as a socio-political, historical, and cultural phenomenon that is shaped by symbolic and sociocultural structures, political ideas, literary representations, narratives and practices in various world settings” [71] (pp. 1–2).

For one of her last musings about the field, see the views of the late critical disability studies scholar from India, Anita Ghai, a pioneer in disability studies/critical disability studies and the role of disabled women [72]. Within critical disability studies, disability justice introduces a distinctly intersectional lens [51,53,73,74,75] and now serves as one of the primary frameworks used in teaching the field [50,76]. Disability studies is linked to intersectional pedagogy [50]. Using a critical disability studies lens assumes certain ways allies of DP/PDWs act (accountable collaborator in [54]), which comes with certain dangers for allies.

To interpret our findings, we also drew on some of the 35 ability-based concepts coined within the disability rights movement and the fields of disability and the three strands of ability-based studies (ability expectation and ableism studies, short ability studies [77,78,79], studies in ableism [80,81,82], and critical studies of ableism [67,83]), which examine the role of ability-based expectations, judgments, norms, and conflicts, as many of the social factors leading to burnout issues can be linked back to ability-based expectations, judgments, norms, and conflicts, such as experiencing disablism. We also made use in our analysis of social stress theory and minority stress theory, where “the concept of social stress extends stress theory by suggesting that conditions in the social environment, not only personal events, are sources of stress that may lead to mental and physical ill effects” [84] (p. 675), and minority stress as a means to highlight the negative impact of marginalization on activism [85]. These concepts taken together support the view that ally burnout can be understood as a consequence of accumulated social stressors allies experienced by non-disabled allies of DP/PWDs and disabled allies supporting others.

2.3. Source of Participants

The targeted demographic for our surveys were undergraduate critical disability studies students because disability studies courses are based on furthering social justice for disabled people [17] and enhancing the lived reality of disabled people in all their facets [18]. As such, it is assumed that students joining a disability studies degree (1) engage with the social problems DP/PWDs face in order to make a positive difference in the lives of DP/PWDs [21], (2) see themselves as allies of DP/PWDs [20], and (3) want to raise awareness about the problematic lived reality of DP/PWDs [22].

2.4. Survey: Question Development

The questions we present here are a subset of questions asked of students as assignments throughout the course.

The full survey questions for this study are outlined below. The questions were piloted with, and feedback on the wording of the questions was obtained from, a small sample of disabled and non-disabled students from within and outside of the critical disability studies degree within the university. These students were known by the authors for some time and were judged by the authors to be seen as allies of DP/PWDs. Furthermore, these students saw themselves as allies of DP/PWDs and others. Questions were slightly modified, and the final version of the questions, which are listed in

Table 1. Survey questions.

Theme	Question
Allyship	(1) Who can be an ally of people with disabilities (PWDs)/disabled people (DP)? (open-ended) (2) What does it involve to be an ally to DP/PWDs? (open-ended) (3) What are your views on the below 40 statements (adapted from [54]) on what it means to be an ally of DP/PWDs?
Ally burnout of non-disabled allies of disabled people	(4) Do you think that non-disabled allies of DP/PWDs that involve themselves in disability topic activism could be in danger of burnout? (5) There are two main categories that could be the cause of the danger of burnout for allies: (a) the body/mind not fitting the expected norm and (b) the “social environment, social context, sociocultural context, or milieu, which refers to the immediate physical and social setting in which people live or in which something happens or develops” (Wikipedia). If you answered the prior question, which is about non-disabled allies, with “yes”, do you think it is caused by …? (a) the body/mind not fitting the expected norm or (b) the “social environment, social context, sociocultural context, or milieu, which refers to the immediate physical and social setting in which people live or in which something happens or develops” (you can click on both). (6) In case you indicated in the prior question the “social environment” with Yes: what do you think are the factors, the reasons, that make you think they are in danger of burnout? (open-ended) (7) Which disability-related activism topics do you think contain a particularly high danger of leading to burnout of allies of DP/PWDs? (open-ended)
DP/PWDs as allies of others	(8–10) questions, (4–6) were repeated from, in the context of DP/PWDs as allies of other DP/PWDs, rather than non-disabled people being the allies.

, were used.

For the topic of ally burnout, students were given the premise that authentic allies are seen to take actions and that therefore one could see allies as activists, and the following definition of activist burnout was provided: “Activist burnout has been defined as when long-term activism-related stressors deteriorate activists’ physical or emotional health or sense of connectedness to their movements, impacting their effectiveness or abilities to remain engaged” [9] (p. 365).

2.5. Data Collection

Survey questions were distributed via a university’s Qualtrics online platform to eighty-seven students during an undergraduate critical disability studies course that took place in the fall semester between September 2024 and December 2024. Students completed the questionnaire as part of a standard pass/fail marked course assignment. Students were expected to answer all questions; however, the system did not force them to do so. Nevertheless, students had to click through every question before they could click the submit button. The instructor could check if a student did not answer questions. The deadline for the survey was 8 November 2024, and the survey results were compiled through Qualtrics and incorporated into the lecture on 25 November, without identifying a given student, that covered burnout and allyship to facilitate discussion on allyship with and of DP/PWDs, including ally burnout. The responses represented the students’ perspectives prior to engaging with the lecture material on the topic. In compliance with the ethics approval from the Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board of the University of Calgary; Approval number REB 23-0605, 22 July 2023, students saw this as a normal course assignment during the time they had to do the assignment. After the final marks were given by the instructor and approved by the university, the students were asked by email whether they would agree that the data be used without attributing the data to any person for a potential publication. Only a PDF of the data generated by the Qualtrics software, which had no names attached to any answers, was used for the analysis. The course assignment content of any student that would not have agreed would have been removed from the dataset by the instructor before the analysis. None asked to be removed.

2.6. Data Analysis

As to our qualitative online survey, basic quantitative descriptive percent (%) data was extracted and analyzed using Qualtrics’s intrinsic frequency distribution analysis capability. The qualitative results of the open-ended questions were downloaded as one PDF with no mentioning names of students. We performed a directed thematic analysis [86,87] following the six-phase thematic analysis process outlined by Braun and Clarke [87].

Using trustworthiness measures for qualitative data [88,89,90]; as to confidence, this was a class assignment, the instructor was deeply engaged with participants and peer debriefing between the authors was employed. Differences in codes and theme suggestions of the qualitative data were few and discussed between the authors and revised as needed [89]. Confirmability is evident in the audit trail made possible by the comment function in Adobe Acrobat 2025 software [91]. As for transferability, the description of our method gives all the required information for others to decide whether they want to use our qualitative online survey in other settings. There are many other groups one can ask, such as disability studies students from other universities, especially in the Global South, and from different stages of the degree. As DP/PWDs need allies from all walks of life and areas of expertise, one should also ask the questions of other potential allies, as ally burnout is an important topic in general. Then, one can modify the questions to move away from DP/PWDs to focus on other marginalized groups or modify the questions so they can be asked of people who see themselves as allies based on a topic.

2.7. Limitations

This study has several limitations. Students were not given the survey questions as a document beforehand and could not seek clarifications in real time, as they did the survey. as one could do in an in person/virtual interview. However, a student could have paused the survey and emailed the instructor in case they did not understand a question they were to answer. No email was sent. Additionally, we did not collect demographic data because the survey was part of a standard graded assignment aimed at fostering engagement with course topics. Asking demographic questions might have disrupted the sense of anonymity within the group. If we had asked for demographic details and provided those data during the course lecture or in this paper, students might have been able to attach certain answers to certain subgroups, which are so low in class that one could take an educated guess who the student was. This would not only have gone against ethics approval but might have also potentially discouraged students from consenting to the survey to be used.

Given the purposive nature of this course, the results of this study are not meant to be generalized to the perspectives of all students or on all allies being allies of DP/PWDs and DP/PWDs being allies of others. Indeed, we suggest that answers depend on many factors, such as former exposure to DP/PWDs and, within that, which body/mind characteristics, and in what role (sibling, friend, neighbor, seeing the person but no real contact). However, as this is, to our knowledge, the first study with the focus on ally burnout in relation to DP/PWDs, the questions provided should allow others to perform studies that focus on other groups, including other disability studies student groups from different years in the degree and from different geographical locations, students from other degrees, and participants that are not students. Once more studies are conducted, one might be able to generate a meta-analysis on this topic based on answers given in various studies.

Social desirability is a possibility all the time. Students might assume the instructor wants to hear certain answers based on prior lectures of the instructor in this disability studies course. This social desirability might be a possibility for the Yes/No questions. However, it would be very hard for the students to assume what qualitative answers the instructor wants to see.

3. Results

In Section 3 we provide first a summary of our findings (Section 3.1) and then the full data (Section 3.2), whereby we provide table and a summary of the table after each table.

Both sections are subdivided reflecting the three areas of focus of the questions as outlined in Table 1 allyship, ally burnout of non-disabled allies of DP/PWDs, and DP/PWDs as allies of others.

3.1. Summary of Findings of the Ten Questions (Table 1)

3.1.1. General Questions on Allyship

(1)

As to question 1 (open-ended), which asked who can be an ally, the majority, 70 of 83 students indicated that “everyone can be an ally”.

(2)

As to question 2 (open-ended), which focused on what it involves to be an ally to DP/PWDs, the main themes found were

(a)

to gain knowledge by educating oneself, listening to disabled people, and transmitting one’s own knowledge by educating others;

(b)

to be an activist, and they outlined fifty-four different action items one should take as an ally, with challenging ableism mentioned thirteen times;

(c)

to be supportive of DP/PWDs, to amplify their voices, to promote DP/PWDs, to be empathetic to DP/PWDs, and to acknowledge the problem DP/PWDs face; and

(d)

to be careful how one behaves towards DP/PWDs.

(3)

As to question 3, which asked participants about their views on forty statements given below, suggesting what it means to be an ally of DP/PWDs, the following was obtained (ranking was performed from highest to lowest for “I agree strongly”).

The top five for strongly agreeing were:

29. Advocates for all community settings to be inherently barrier-free;

35. Advocates for all workplace settings to be inherently barrier-free;

5. Works to ensure people with disability can access the services they legally deserve;

19. Believes persons w/disability when they communicate about their experiences; and

26. Values the benefits of diverse perspectives including people w/disability.

Four statements had less than 50% strongly agreeing and had a high level of I can’t say/have no opinion

38. Knows that people experiencing disability often need to rely on experts acting on their behalf;

32. Knows that some people overcome their impairments through heroic effort;

6. Experiences distress about one’s own unearned advantages; and

2. Understands that disability is caused by a health condition,

3.1.2. Ally Burnout of Non-Disabled Allies of DP/PWDs

(4)

As to question 4, which asked whether non-disabled allies of DP/PWDs that involve themselves in disability topic activism could be in danger of burnout, the main answer was “Yes” (77.11%, n = 64)

(5)

As to question 5, which asked for the origin of the burnout of non-disabled allies of DP/PWDs, for the two options, the majority answered “No” and rejected the body/mind being a cause of the burnout (37.97%, n = 30) and the majority stated “Yes” to the social environment as the cause (74.07%, n = 60).

(6)

As to question 6 (open-ended), which asked about the social factors that could cause ally burnout of non-disabled allies, the theme mentioned the most was “attitudinal inaccessibility”. Some other themes mentioned included lack of knowledge of others, lack of support and hostile responses, emotional issues, and that no change is seen.

(7)

As to question 7 (open-ended), which asked about disability related-activism topics that are seen as particularly dangerous for allies to engage with, participants mentioned many topics. The topic of “accessibility” was mentioned the most, followed by systemic obstacles and resistance. Many topics were only mentioned once.

3.1.3. DP/PWDs Acting as Allies of Disabled People of Another Disability Group

(8)

As to question 8, which asked whether DP/PWDs of one disability group that act as allies of DP/PWDs of another disability group could be in danger of burnout, the main answer was “Yes” (81.93%, n = 68);

(9)

As to the question 9, that asked for the origin of the burnout of disabled allies for the two options, that the body/mind could be a cause of the burnout, “Yes” was ticked the most (45.33%, n = 34) as was the answer for the social environment (84.21%, n = 64), whereby the social environment was seen by more as the problem than the body/mind;

(10)

As to question 10 (open-ended), which asked about the social factors that could cause ally burnout of disabled allies, the top theme was attitudinal inaccessibility. Some others were, for example, lack of knowledge of others, lack of support and hostile responses, emotional issues, and that no change is seen.

3.2. Results in Detail

3.2.1. General Questions on Allyship

We list in

Table 2. Who can be an ally of DP/PWDs (students that answered, n = 83).

Individual/Group	Response Frequency
Anyone or everyone	70
Family	15
Friend	14
Educator	10
Colleagues/co-worker	8
Healthcare worker/provider	7
Community	7
Government	7
Employer	3
Politician	2
DP/PWDs	2
Policy maker	2
Caregiver	1
Community organization	1
Advocacy organization	1
Activist	1
The public	1
Society	1
Classmates	1
Individuals that work with DP/PWDs	1

the topics students gave in their answers to question 1, which asked about who an ally of DP/PWDs could be. The top answer was that anyone can be an ally (70 out of 83 respondents). Others with at least ten mentions were only family (n = 15), friends (n = 14), and educators (n = 10).

We list in

Table 3. What does it involve to be an ally to DP/PWDs? (students that responded, n = 81).

Theme	Frequency	Sub-Theme	Subtheme Frequency	Relevant Quotes (Please Note, the Quotes Do Not Reflect the Full Quotes but the Part of the Quote Reflecting the Theme; Therefore, Below Are Mostly Not Complete Sentences)
Advocacy and Action	131	Taking Action	50	action without further explanation (n = 4); willing to help and support; participating in protests or petitions; stand up for their rights to have accessible futures; speaking out against discrimination; support people with disability to access service that they have right to; provides sympathetic support for people experiencing disability in different ways; challenge discriminatory behavior or systems; give support when needed; creating inclusive spaces; standing in solidarity to ensure their rights are upheld; standing up for dignity; to ensure quality of life; to value disabled individuals; active advocacy and learning; protesting for more funding; protest; challenge discrimination within the society; addressing the main conflicts people with disabilities face; use inclusive language; using inclusive language; creating a safe space; challenging the systemic barriers holding dp back; fighting for accessibility and equality within society; protecting the spaces for dp to speak about their experiences; standing up for people with disabilities; actively participating in the rights; addressing systemic challenges and social barriers that can impede their opportunities and independence; accommodate employees, advocate for reasonable accommodations, advocate publicly, and financial support for disabled people; ensure that there is support surrounding systems that initiate inclusivity; accessibility in all kinds of spaces; fighting for better rights and lives for pwd; helping to eliminate societal barriers; advocating for changes in the workplace; education and daily life; support an environment that proposes equal and accommodating standards of living; standing with them in order to fight against the barriers in society that causes them to be disabled; critiquing the current views towards disability in order to refine it in a way that does not depict disability as an individual problem, but rather a societal problem; supporting, advocating, and creating a more accessible and inclusive society; using inclusive languages; speaking out again disability-based violence; stand up against discrimination; fight for equal rights; listen and engage with the communities that exist; engage in ongoing conversations about disability rights; supporting the basic rights of disabled people
		Advocate/Activism	28	Advocacy/advocate (n = 5); activism (n = 5); advocating for changes that promote equity and inclusion; advocate for their rights; action aimed at supporting the rights, dignity, and inclusion of individuals with disabilities; using the privilege of having access to certain abilities to advocate for disabled people; involves actively trying to ensure that there are measures which allow disabled people to access sites; advocating for their inclusivity; advocating for accessibility and inclusion; work towards creating a more equitable environment; being willing to call others out on their disablism within the workplace; advocating for accessibility; find ways to advocate for change; adjusting the language used in discussions to be less limiting; actively advocating for the rights and freedoms of disabled individuals in society that allow them to have the same quality of life as those who are not disabled, as well as pointing out and not tolerating the systemic abuse of pwd; advocate for things like equality and improved accessibility; advocating for policies that protect and empower disabled individuals
		Challenge Ableism	16	Ableism as a target for ableism using different phrases such as challenge ableism (n = 9); challenge ability privileges; challenging ableism and stereotypes; challenging ableism and discrimination; promoting accessibility and inclusion in various spaces; to challenge stereotypes; challenging ableism in everyday life; monitoring and challenging ableist language and attitudes in everyday conversations including our own
		Amplify Disabled Voices	12	“Amplify their voices” (n = 4); helping disabled voices be heard; amplifying their stories and voices; supporting their rights without speaking over them; uplifting the voices of disabled individuals; to amplify disabled voices; empowering their voices; exemplify the voices; raise their voices up
		Shifting Behavior towards DP/PWDs	11	Not being ableist; not treating people with disabilities as inherently different; respect their autonomy; advocating for autonomy; respect independence and autonomy; acknowledging one’s own privilege; use your privilege to support disabled people; empower disabled individuals to make decisions for themselves; Inclusive Communication; Respect preferences for how someone wants to be referred to—some prefer “person with a disability” (person-first) while others prefer “disabled person” (identity-first); always speak directly to a disabled person, not to their interpreter, caregiver, or companion, unless directed otherwise
		Promote Inclusion	5	promoting inclusion, equality, and respect for their rights and experience; promote inclusivity in various aspects of society, including media representation; respect for the disabled population; promoting diversity, inclusivity, and equity for everyone; promote accessibility
		Being Empathetic	1	Being empathetic
		Advocate for Representation	4	Making sure that they are being included in conversations about things that affect them and not being left out; being an ally is more than just supporting disabled rights; it’s about being a part of a community where you are being an activist for people whose voices are not being heard; being an active citizen
		Research and Knowledge Production	2	encouraging more involvement of disabled individuals in community interventions, as well as future research; research
		Acknowledge Injustice	2	acknowledging social justices; acknowledge when you see discrimination and prejudice towards disabled people
Knowledge and Awareness	102	Educate Yourself	31	“educating yourself” (n = 7); be aware of the current situations; understanding; listening to the experiences of people with disabilities; to fully understand their perspective and stigmas; learning more about disability; commitment to learning and growth; accepts responsibility for educating self and others; actively listening; educating oneself; being aware/educated of their experiences, plight, and issues; meaningful discussions for and with disabled people; understanding and open to educating yourself; self-education; to be well informed on issues; awareness; attending events to further educate yourself and others on the challenges disabled individuals face and how we can address them; educate themselves about disability issue; educating yourself; educating oneself on issues dp face; you need to know what you are standing up for; recognize the various issues or hardships that disabled people face; learning about the history of the disability rights movement; educating oneself; willing to learn
		Listen to Disabled people	17	Active listening to the stories of people with disabilities without making assumptions; should also listen to the experiences of pwd/dp; valuing their opinions; open to criticism; listening to their experiences and how they think you can be an ally; hearing the voices of persons with disabilities; listening to the voices of them; listening to the experiences, stories, and wants of disabled individuals; listening actively; listening to disabled voices; listening and understanding perspectives from people with disabilities; listening to and amplifying their voices; listening and respecting lived experiences; listening to their choices regarding their lives, support, and activities; being educated on pwd; making yourself aware of the problems; listen to perspectives from the disabled community; active listening
		Educate Oneself: Specific Topic	21	Understanding that disability is caused by a health condition; stigma; ableism; barriers disabled people face; understand that the norms are what make disabled people have a disability; on accurate knowledge on the barriers and discrimination that disabled people face; continue to learn; being educated on systematic issues that discriminate and oppress persons with disability; learn about the struggles that it means to be disabled; must be educated to be able to know the stereotypes and misconceptions that are being spread around social media and public places; learning how to take impactful action; about disability to avoid ableism; educate yourself on the social reality of people with disabilities; understanding that they are not atypical because their bodies are different; involves constantly educating yourself on what is right and wrong and having an open mind; understanding the experiences and barriers that they face; recognizing false/misleading info about pwd; learn about their lived experiences; requires being able to point out differences that disabled people experience in treatment compared to able-bodied people; you also have to be able to see disabled people the same as everybody else; acknowledging they have their own opinions and many of them can advocate for themselves; being educated on what individual’s with disabilities are feeling and how we can support
		Educate Others	9	Individuals must be educated on the topic; educating people; and helping educate others about disability; accepts responsibility for educating self and others; providing data; providing useful resources to other allies or people with disabilities; attending events to further educate yourself and others on the challenges disabled individuals face and how we can address them; educating people; stand against false narratives and stereotypes
		Be a Knowledge- Producer	1	answering surveys regarding these topics
		Educate Others: Specific Topic	7	Intersectionality; marginalization affect individuals; about misconceptions and common oppressors of pwd/dp; that people understand that they will have to ask for the same thing thousands of time and still not get it; to participate in EDIA; activism; political campaigns and lobbying to better inform society about the requirements of people with disability
		Spreading Awareness	16	“Spreading awareness” (n = 2); willing to spread awareness; spreading awareness on ableism; spread awareness by illustrating how marginalization greatly impacts people with disabilities; people well aware of EDI should spread awareness in promoting this in society; spread awareness on disability rights and inclusion; bring attention to these issues; provide practical support by providing information about disability movements or studies; making information accessible, and providing extra hands during events where needed; raising awareness about the challenges of disabled people; to keep awareness and interest on the issues of disabled people and people with disabilities; speaking about their struggles; raising awareness about the daily obstacles pwd/dp face; raising awareness about accessibility/accommodations; spreading awareness of injustice and how disabled people are often excluded as a group
Allyship Values and Identity	14	Self-Reflection and Privilege	7	acknowledges different experiences and respect to others; acknowledging their own ability privilege; Challenge unconscious bias; trying to reduce these biases; working to overcome your own biases; reflect on their own biases; not utilizing stigmatize perspectives
		Commitment and Accountability	5	commitment to cause; understanding; compassion; being respectful; open mind
		Respect Boundaries and Autonomy	2	to be involved in making decisions for those with disabilities and making them fair; respects boundaries and offers help only when asked or explicitly needed

the topics students gave in their answer to question 2, which was about what does it involve to be an ally to DP/PWD?

The theme of advocacy and action was mentioned (n = 131) times with the following sub-themes: taking action (n = 50); advocate/activism (n = 28); challenge ableism (n = 16); amplify disabled voices and shifting behavior towards DP/PWDs (n = 12) each; promote inclusion, (n = 6); advocate for representation (n = 4); research and knowledge production and acknowledge injustice (n = 2) each; and being empathetic (n = 1).

The theme of knowledge and awareness was mentioned (n = 102) times with the following sub-themes: educate yourself (n = 31); listen to disabled people (n = 18); educate oneself: specific topic (n = 21); educate others (n = 9); be a knowledge-producer (n = 1); educate others: specific topic (n = 7); and spreading awareness (n = 15).

The theme allyship values and identity was mentioned (n = 13) times with the following sub-themes: self-reflection and privilege (n = 7); commitment and accountability (n = 4) and respect boundaries, and autonomy (n = 2) each.

As to the third question, which was about the views of participants on the forty statements given below on what it means to be an ally of DP/PWDs, the following was obtained (ranking was performed highest to lowest for “I agree strongly”) (

Table 4. Participant viewpoints on the meaning of allyship for DP/PWDs.

Question Number and Question	I Do Not Agree		I Agree Weakly		I Agree Strongly		I Cannot Say/Have No Opinion		Total
29. Advocates for all community settings to be inherently barrier-free.	0.00%	0	2.47%	2	93.83%	76	3.70%	3	81
35. Advocates for all workplace settings to be inherently barrier-free.	0.00%	0	3.61%	3	92.77%	77	3.61%	3	83
5. Works to ensure people with disability can access the services they legally deserve.	0.00%	0	2.41%	2	90.36%	75	7.23%	6	83
19. Believes persons w/disability when they communicate about their experiences.	1.20%	1	3.61%	3	90.36%	75	4.82%	4	83
26. Values the benefits of diverse perspectives including people w/disability.	0.00%	0	3.66%	3	90.24%	74	6.10%	5	82
1. Supports flexible schedules so persons w/disability can meet shifting needs.	0.00%	0	4.82%	4	87.95%	73	7.23%	6	83
15. Educates oneself re: lived experiences of people w/disability.	0.00%	0	4.82%	4	87.95%	73	7.23%	6	83
23. Knows people w/disability are individuals who may have shared experiences of discrimination.	2.41%	2	6.02%	5	87.95%	73	3.61%	3	83
40. Knows that disability is one among many enriching attributes of personal identity.	1.20%	1	6.02%	5	87.95%	73	4.82%	4	83
25. Advocates for all learning settings to be inherently barrier-free.	0.00%	0	7.23%	6	86.75%	72	6.02%	5	83
16. Knows that experiences of disability are multifaceted.	0.00%	0	3.61%	3	85.54%	71	10.84%	9	83
31. Understands disability as a natural expression of human diversity rather than as a problem.	2.41%	2	4.82%	4	85.54%	71	7.23%	6	83
34. Creates opportunities to advocate for disability rights.	0.00%	0	8.43%	7	85.54%	71	6.02%	5	83
3. Accepts responsibility for educating self and others re: enabled privilege.	0.00%	0	7.23%	6	84.34%	70	8.43%	7	83
21. Knows we all need to unlearn nondisabled = superior or normal.	1.20%	1	7.23%	6	84.34%	70	7.23%	6	83
37. Knows importance of collaboration w/persons w/disability to undo disablism.	1.22%	1	7.32%	6	84.15%	69	7.32%	6	82
20. Understands social norms give unearned advantage to the nondisabled.	0.00%	0	6.02%	5	83.13%	69	10.84%	9	83
33. Recognizes racism, sexism, etc. influence experiences of disablism/enabled privilege.	1.20%	1	7.23%	6	83.13%	69	8.43%	7	83
14. Consults persons experiencing disability/disablism before taking action(s).	1.20%	1	8.43%	7	81.93%	68	8.43%	7	83
27. Takes actions to dismantle disablism even when doing so reduces one’s own social power.	1.20%	1	4.82%	4	81.93%	68	12.05%	10	83
28. Knows that social stigmas constitute chronic stressors for persons experiencing disability.	0.00%	0	8.43%	7	81.93%	68	9.64%	8	83
22. Networks with groups working for disability rights.	0.00%	0	9.88%	8	81.48%	66	8.64%	7	81
30. Knows that non-disabled people are often unaware of their enabled privilege.	0.00%	0	10.84%	9	80.72%	67	8.43%	7	83
36. Is open to personal critique regarding disability/disablism/enabled privilege.	2.41%	2	6.02%	5	79.52%	66	12.05%	10	83
24. Networks with groups providing services to people experiencing disability.	0.00%	0	13.25%	11	77.11%	64	9.64%	8	83
11. Develops friendships with people experiencing disability/disablism.	2.44%	2	13.41%	11	74.39%	61	9.76%	8	82
17. Knows that being non-disabled influences one’s identity.	1.20%	1	7.23%	6	73.49%	61	18.07%	15	83
13. Empathizes with people experiencing disability/disablism.	1.20%	1	15.66%	13	72.29%	60	10.84%	9	83
18. Knows to speak for oneself rather than for persons with disability.	10.98%	9	8.54%	7	71.95%	59	8.54%	7	82
9. Is committed to leveraging personal privilege to undo systems of unearned advantage.	0.00%	0	18.07%	15	71.08%	59	10.84%	9	83
12. Seeks business relationships w/people w/disability.	6.02%	5	13.25%	11	67.47%	56	13.25%	11	83
7. Advocates for charitable groups as providers of needed services for people w/disability.	2.41%	2	18.07%	15	66.27%	55	13.25%	11	83
10. Provides sympathetic support for people experiencing disability.	13.25%	11	14.46%	12	62.65%	52	9.64%	8	83
8. Experiences distress about unearned disadvantages for people w/disability.	2.41%	2	18.07%	15	61.45%	51	18.07%	15	83
39. Provides direct assistance to persons experiencing disability.	4.82%	4	19.28%	16	60.24%	50	15.66%	13	83
4. Works as a service provider to people experiencing disability.	10.84%	9	26.51%	22	50.60%	42	12.05%	10	83
38. Knows that people experiencing disability often need to rely on experts acting on their behalf.	19.28%	16	15.66%	13	48.19%	40	16.87%	14	83
32. Knows that some people overcome their impairments through heroic effort.	15.66%	13	21.69%	18	39.76%	33	22.89%	19	83
6. Experiences distress about one’s own unearned advantages.	16.87%	14	21.69%	18	38.55%	32	22.89%	19	83
2. Understands that disability is caused by a health condition.	22.89%	19	28.92%	24	28.92%	24	19.28%	16	83

).

3.2.2. Ally Burnout of Non-Disabled Allies of DP/PWDs

As to question 4, which asked whether non-disabled allies of DP/PWDs that involve themselves in disability topic activism could be in danger of burnout, the answers were the following: yes (77.11%, n = 64); no (2.41%; n = 2); and Do Not Know/Cannot Say (20.48%, n = 17) (

Table 5. Do you think that non-disabled allies of DP/PWDs that involve themselves in disability topic activism could be in danger of burnout? (n = 83 responses).

Yes	No	Do Not Know
77.11% (n = 64)	2.41% (n = 2)	20.48% (n = 17)

).

As to question 5, which asked for the origin of the burnout of non-disabled allies of DP/PWDs, for the two options, the answers by the disability studies students for body/mind not being ability-normative (what many label as an impairment) were Yes (30.38%, n = 24), No (37.97%, n = 30), and Do Not Know/Cannot Say (31.65% (n = 25); the answers for the social environment, social context, sociocultural context, or milieu, the numbers were Yes (74.07%,, n = 60), No (2.47%, n = 2), and Do Not Know/Cannot Say (23.46%, n = 19), (

Table 6. Answers to the question on the origin of the burnout of non-disabled allies of DP/PWDs, (more than one response was possible) (students could click on both options) (n= 81 responses for second option; n = 79 for first option).

Origin of the Burnout	Yes	No	Do Not Know
“the body/mind not being ability normative (what many label as impairment),”	30.38% (n = 24)	37.97 (n = 30)	31.65% (n = 25)
the social environment, social context, sociocultural context, or milieu	74.07% (n = 60)	2.47% (n = 2)	23.46% (n = 19)

).

As to question 6, which asked about the social factors that could lead to ally burnout of non-disabled allies, the answers were as follows (

Table 7. Social factors leading to burnout of non-disabled allies of DP/PWDs (students that responded, n = 66).

Theme	Frequency	Subtheme	SubthemeFrequency	Relevant Quotes (Please Note, the Quotes Do Not Reflect the Full Quotes but the Part of the Quote Reflecting the Theme; Therefore, Below Are Mostly Not Complete Sentences)
Accessibility	1			Transportation
Attitudinal Inaccessibility	27	Criticized	6	many people do not have the same views—discussions about what they believe are basic rights may lead to arguments; society’s ability to be so negative and judgmental; many individuals are disconnected from disabled people and their potential contributions to our community. They are almost always viewed in a deficiency framework by non-disabled people and this results in non-disabled allies often being perceived as excessive; advocating for something which should be given less priority compared to other issues; many individuals do not see the reason why disabled people should be seen as valuable; hate from ableist individuals
		Ableism; Disablism	4	ableism in society; challenge ableism can be exhausting especially if they feel its an only uphill battle; consistent ignorance from ableist individuals; disablism is embedded through a lot of our social systems and daily actions even if its subconscious
		Constantly Having to Act	4	consistent ignorance from ableist individuals; resistance, in general, to integrating more disabled people within the public field is something which non-disabled people have to hear and fight against within their day-to-day life; consistently working hard for their cause may result in burnout; constant advocacy
		Stigma	3	societal stigma against disability; stereotype; stigma society created around disabled people
		Constantly Fighting Attitudinal Inaccessibility	3	Pushing back against the dominant social beliefs and systems; many people do not have the same views; discussions about what they believe are basic rights may lead to arguments
		Discrimination	3	Discriminations they face; oppressive societal factors; unfair treatment
		Barriers	2	“Systemic barriers” (n = 2)
		Constantly Fighting Bias	1	does not aim to make many accommodations which will allow them to access services and devices outside of very basic materials; fight against the societal perception of disability
		Microaggression	1	Marginalization
Lack of Knowledge	22	-	8	people and organizations that do not pay attention to the needs or wants of disabled people; ignorance; corporations and the government and not enough information and education about disability; many individuals do not see the challenges which disabled people face; misinformed individuals; misinformed opinions from other communities; the ignorance and the unwillingness to learn that may be held by much of the general public regarding the experiences of disabled people; the presence of ignorance in the normal population about the difficulties faced by disabled people
		Constantly Having to Explain	5	constantly repeating themselves; people and organizations that do not pay attention to the needs or wants of disabled people; consistent ignorance from ableist individuals; asking for the same thing repeatedly but their needs are still not met; ensure that knowledge is spread about the disabled experience instead of allowing stereotypes to perpetuate
		Not Respected	1	not being taken seriously
		Not Being Listened To	5	that they are not being listened; people and organizations that do not pay attention to the needs or wants of disabled people; feeling helpless when it comes to advocating policy inclusivity due to a non-listening government; struggles with being heard; other people refusing to listen or see another person’s point of view
		Social Pushback (could also be part of attitudinal inaccessibility)	3	Pushback; backlash that is received by certain individuals in society by people who do not agree with what they are trying to advocate for; backlash from the public
Lack of Support and Recognition	19	Imbalance of Power	1	People with disabilities also aren’t a part of the group that holds the power
		Lack of Support	11	lack of support (7); lack of support from peers or educators; lack of societal support; lack of support networks; funding; degrading individuals; unsupportive individuals
		Negative Reaction to Activism Activity (could also be part of attitudinal inaccessibility)	5	anxiety of facing discrimination in public social environments; many people do not have the same views; discussions about what they believe are basic rights may lead to arguments; harassment; fearful of others’ judgment
		Lack of Recognition	2	Lack of recognition; not acknowledge their efforts to advocate
Futility and Burnout from Inaction	16	No Impact	2	environment can create barriers that impacts their effectiveness of remaining engaged; feelings of inadequacy in advocating effectively
		No Progress	13	slow progress; may not be seeing any actions being taken; people do not care if change is still not happening after countless protests; activism; awareness; the social environment is not prone to change despite the constant efforts to spread awareness; people are not willing to change their way of thinking; not seeing tangible results; putting in full effort to get little/no results; their actions are not doing anything; does not see great results; facing exhausting news; no change is happening if the work being done is not working or helping
Emotional and Psychological Toll	16	Emotional Issues	11	“emotional labor” (n = 2); emotional exhaustion; emotional burden of advocating for pwd/dp; emotional investment; emotional fatigue; compassion fatigue; emotional toll of confronting systemic barriers; lack of boundaries; ally helplessness; helpless trying to dismantle these systems
		Self-Care	1	neglecting one’s own self-care
		Overworked	4	having personal things going on; may overwork themselves; prolonged advocacy-related stress; advocating for self or others is a strenuous and exhausting process
Systemic and Normative Barriers	14	Norms	6	societal norms; making decisions based on societal norms; it is hard to try and dismantle expectations and societal norms that have been imposed for many of years; its difficult to fight against the profound social norms; discriminatory norms accepted in our society; preexisting norms
		Pressure	4	society pressure; societal pressures; external pressures; society pressuring other or being judged by society
		Too Complex	3	Feeling helplessness in that things such as systemic racism and barriers are so deeply rooted in our society that it is impossible to completely make disappear; experiencing/learning about the negative aspects of society that the disabled community has to face can be very eye-opening; still, it can also take a toll on one’s mental health
		Too Much Effort Needed	1	takes a lot of hard work
Isolation and Helplessness	4	Isolated/Isolation	3	lack a sense of connectedness due to these barriers in the environment because it lacks the ability of being inclusive and diverse for everyone to be involved in; social isolation in their social circles that do not understand their advocacy efforts; many people do not have the same views
		Every Ally is in Danger of Burnout	1	I think anyone can be in danger of burnout; despite their abilities and being able to try and dismantle them can be hard especially if systemic forces stop you from doing so. Which can be hard to be an ally in those times where these factors feel as though they are out of your control; but are necessary for advocating and creating change for people with disabilities
Misunderstanding	1			frustration due to misunderstandings

).

Accessibility was mentioned one (n = 1) time.

The theme attitudinal inaccessibility was mentioned (n = 29) times with the following sub-themes: criticized (n = 8); ableism, disablism, and constantly having to act (n = 4) each; stigma, constantly fighting attitudinal inaccessibility, and discrimination (n = 3) each; barriers (n = 2) and constantly fighting bias and microaggression (n = 1) each.

The theme lack of knowledge was mentioned (n = 22) times with the following sub-themes included: not being listened to (n = 5); constantly having to explain and social pushback (n = 4) each and not respected (n = 1).

The theme lack of support and recognition was mentioned (n = 19) times with the following sub-themes included: lack of support (n = 11); negative reaction to activism activity (n = 5); lack of recognition (n = 2); and imbalance of power (n = 1).

The theme futility and burnout from inaction was mentioned (n = 18) times with the following sub-themes included: no progress (n = 16) and no impact (n = 2).

The theme emotional and psychological toll was mentioned (n = 15) times with the following sub-themes included: emotional issues (n = 11); overworked (n = 3); and self-care (n = 1).

The theme systemic and normative barriers was mentioned (n = 14) times with the following sub-themes included: norms (n = 6); pressure (n = 4); too complex (n = 3); and too much effort needed (n = 1).

The theme isolation and helplessness was mentioned (n = 4) times with the following sub-themes included: isolated/isolation (n = 3) and every ally is in danger of burnout (n = 1).

The theme misunderstanding was mentioned once (n = 1).

As to question 7, which covered what disability related activism topics were seen to lead to a particular high danger of leading to burnout of allies to DP/PWDs, the following was found (

Table 8. Topics that contain a high danger of leading to burnout for allies to DP/PWDs (students that responded, n = 67).

Topics for Activism Leading to Burnout of Non-disabled Allies	Frequency	Subtheme	Subtheme Frequency	Relevant Quotes (Please Note, the Quotes Do Not Reflect the Full Quotes but the Part of the Quote Reflecting the Theme; Therefore, Below Are Mostly Not Complete Sentences)
Accessibility	19	Healthcare	5	access to healthcare; healthcare access and inclusion; healthcare access; victims of war not having access to healthcare; accessing the medical system
		Public Spaces	3	public spaces n = 3
		Assistive Devices and Technologies	2	assistive devices for the disabled population; access to supportive technologies
		Social Activities	1	social activities
		Online	1	online
		Physical Settings	1	physical settings
		Schools	1	Schools
		Environment	1	environment
		Society	1	inaccessibility of society
		Rights to Accessibility	1	rights to accessibility
		Accessibility Goes Beyond DP/PWDs	1	understanding how the idea of accessibility is not only for individuals with disabilities;
		Promoting Accessibility	1	promoting accessibility in social activities, online, and physical settings
Systemic Problem and Systemic Resistance	13	Existing Systemic Barriers	3	services; systemic discrimination in medical care; systemic ableism;
		Challenging Systemic Barriers	4	pushing for systemic reform in how disabled individuals are treated in healthcare setting; challenging systemic barriers; pushing for systemic reform; battling with insurance companies for coverage of disability-related treatments or aids
		Systemic Obstacles	2	systemic obstacles; opposition to altering long-standing educational systems
		Systemic Resistance	4	bureaucratic resistance; systemic resistance; delayed progress, or resistance from institutions; hesitant to make changes
Advocating/Activism	11	Advocating for systemic change	1	advocating for systemic change;
		Public advocacy	1	public advocacy
		Healthcare and medical advocacy for disabled people	3	healthcare and medical advocacy; healthcare and medical advocacy for disabled people; advocating for home healthcare
		Advocating for invisible disabilities	1	advocating for invisible disabilities;
		Changing the widespread social discourses surrounding disablism	1	activism that aims to change social institutions
		Accessibility advocacy	2	fight for accessibility; accessibility advocacy;
		Advocating for policy/legal change	1	advocating for policy
		Constantly having to advocate for basic accommodations	1	constantly advocate for basic accommodations
Health-related	9	Healthcare equity/inequity (including rights, inequality, reform, and victims of war not having access to healthcare)	4	healthcare equity; healthcare inequality; healthcare rights; health inequity
		General	5	healthcare (n + 2); home healthcare services; systemic reform in how disabled individuals are treated in healthcare settings; healthcare reform
Discrimination	8	General	7	discrimination as term (n = 7)
		Medical care	1	systemic discrimination in medical care
Intersectionality	7			intersectionality as term (n = 6); rights for disabled Indigenous people
Environmental-related	7	Environmental Change/Issues	4	environmental change; environmental issues (n = 3)
		Eco-Inclusivity	1	eco-inclusivity
		Natural Disaster Activism	1	natural disaster activism
		Climate Change	1	climate change
Ability Privilege and Privilege	6	Ability Privilege	3	ability privilege (n-3);
		Educating Others on Ability Privilege/Social Dominance	1	educating people who may be resistant to learning about the topic as they may feel it threatens their ability privilege and social dominance;
		Recognizing Privilege as Non-Disabled Allies	1	recognizing privilege as a non-disabled person;
		Ability Privilege Seen as an Advantage	1	the system or institutions view ability privilege as something that is an advantage, rather than focusing on the negative aspects involved in this concept
Educating/Education	5	Educating others	2	educating people who may be resistant to learning about the topic as they may feel it threatens their ability privilege and social dominance; education on disability studies
		Resistance to change in educational system	1	systemic obstacles and opposition to altering long-standing educational systems might make it feel overwhelming
		Education equity	1	education equity
		Changing curriculum design	1	changing curriculum design
Legal	5	Legal Rights for DP/PWDs	2	legal rights (2);
		Advocating for Policy and Legislative Changes	1	rights to accommodation
		Policy Reform	1	legislative changes/policy reform
		Disabled Rights in Policy and Government Implementation	1	get more disabled rights into government and implemented
Increasing funding for DP/PWDs	5			increase funding (n = 3); many believe disabled people have enough funding; many would ignorantly argue that their funding is sufficient
Accommodation	4	Schools	1	Schools
		Public Location/Space	2	public locations; public spaces
		Workplace	1	Workforce
Eugenics	6	Eugenics	2	eugenics n = 2
		Euthanasia	1	Euthanasia
		Selective Abortion	1	selective abortion
		Genetic Testing/Selection	1	all things related to genetic testing and selection; gene editing
		Pregnancy Termination	1	pregnancy terminations
Barriers	4			mental, physically and environmental barrier; body, mind, societal, and environmental barriers; challenging systemic barriers; reducing barriers for more equality
Mental health-related	4			mental health awareness (n = 2); stigma and misunderstanding around mental health and people with disability; mental
All topics/Any Topic	4			all topics; any topic with large change; any topics which relate to disability within sport; topics that are slow to bring forth changes
Ableism	4			ableism as a term (n = 4)
Normality/Norms	4			societal pressures to maintain the norm; knowing the true definition of normality; inaccessibility of society, so that everyone expect disabled people can function normally; ability normative
Employment/Work	4	Employment equity	2	employment equity (n = 2)
		Employment/pay gap	2	employment; pay gaps
Representation	3	Giving disabled people a voice	1	giving disabled people a voice
		Media representation	1	media representation of people with disabilities
		More in public service	1	more in public service
Model of Disability	3			social model of disability (n = 2); that have an innate historical origins that relates to the medical model of disabilities and the industrial revolution
Violence and Abuse	3			violence against people with disabilities; sexual abuse; abuse
Stereotype	2			stereotype (n = 2)
Affordable Housing	1			affordable housing
Disability Justice	1			disability justice
Artificial Intelligence	1			the effects of artificial intelligence on people with disabilities
EDI	1			EDI
Actions that come at the ‘expense’ of non-disabled people (priority seating on busses)	1			actions that come at the ‘expense’ of non-disabled people (priority seating on busses)
Objectification	1			objectification
Stigma	1			stigma
Language Change	1			changing the language used in discussions about disabilities
Biases	1			social biases
Disablism	1			changing the widespread social discourses surrounding disablism

).

Table 8 outlines the topics that were flagged as containing a high danger of burnout for allies of DP/PWD.

The theme Accessibility was mentioned sixteen times with the sub-themes being Healthcare (n = 6); Public Spaces (n = 3), Assistive Devices and Technologies (n = 2), and Environment, Social Activities, Online, Physical Settings, Schools, Society, Rights to Accessibility, Accessibility Goes Beyond Disabled People, and Promoting accessibility, all (n = 1) each.

The theme systemic problem and systemic resistance was mentioned n = 13 times with the following sub-themes: challenging systemic barriers and systemic resistance n = 4 times; existing systemic barriers (n = 3); and systemic obstacles (n = 2).

The theme advocating/activism was mentioned (n = 9) times with the following sub-themes: healthcare and medical advocacy for disabled people (n = 3) and advocating for systemic change, public advocacy, advocating for invisible disabilities, changing the widespread social discourses surrounding disablism, accessibility advocacy, advocating for policy/legal change constantly having to advocate for basic accommodations, all (n = 1) each.

The theme health was mentioned (n = 9) times with the following sub-themes: health in general (n = 5) and healthcare equity/inequity (including rights, inequality, reform, and victims of war not having access to healthcare) (n = 4).

The theme discrimination was mentioned n = 8 times, in general (n =7) times and in relation to medical care (n = 1).

The theme intersectionality was mentioned (n= 7) times.

The theme environmental-related was mentioned (n = 7) times with the following sub-themes: environmental change/issues (n = 4) and eco-inclusivity, natural disaster activism and climate change (n = 1) each.

The theme ability privilege and privilege were mentioned (n = 6) times with the following sub-themes: ability privilege (n = 3) and educating others on ability privilege/social dominance, recognizing privilege as non-disabled allies, and ability privilege seen as an advantage (n = 1) each.

The theme educating/education was mentioned (n = 5) times with the following sub-themes: educating others (n = 2) and resistance to change in educational system, education equity, and changing curriculum design (n = 1) each.

The theme legal was mentioned (n = 5) times with the following sub-themes: legal rights for DP/PWDs (n = 2) and advocating for policy and legislative changes, policy reform, and disabled rights in policy and government implementation (n = 1) each.

The theme increasing funding for disabled people was mentioned (n = 5) times.

The theme accommodation was mentioned (n = 5) times with the following sub-themes: public location/space (n = 3) and schools, workplace (n = 1) each.

The theme eugenics was mentioned (n = 5) times with the following sub-themes: eugenics (n = 2) and euthanasia, selective abortion, genetic testing/selection, and pregnancy termination (n= 1) each.

The themes barriers, mental health-related, all topics/any topic, ableism, normality/norms, and employment/work were mentioned (n = 4) teach.

The theme representation was mentioned (n = 3) times with the following sub-themes: giving disabled people a voice, media representation, and more in public service (n = 1) each.

The themes model of disability and violence and abuse were mentioned (n = 3) times each.

The themes employment equity, employment/pay gap, and stereotype were mentioned (n = 2) times each.

The themes affordable housing, disability justice, artificial intelligence, EDI, actions that come at the ‘expense’ of non-disabled people (priority seating on busses), objectification, stigma, language change, biases, and disablism were mentioned (n = 1) each.

3.2.3. DP/PWDs as Allies of Others

As to question 8—Do you think that DP/PWDs of one disability group that act as allies of DP/PWDs of another disability group that involve themselves in disability topic activism could be in danger of burnout?—the answers given by eighty-three disability studies students were Yes (81.93%, n = 68), No (2.41%; n = 2), and Do Not Know/Cannot Say (15.66%, n-13) (

Table 9. Answers to the following question: Do you think that disabled allies of DP/PWDs that involve themselves in disability topic activism could be in danger of burnout? (n = 83 responses).

Yes	No	Do Not Know
81.93% (n = 68)	2.41% (n = 2)	15.66% (n = 13)

).

As to the question 9 that asked for the origin of the burnout of disabled allies of DP/PWDs for the two options, the answers by the disability studies students for body/mind not being ability normative (what many label as an impairment) were Yes (45.33%, n = 34), No (29.33%, n = 22), and Do Not Know/Cannot Say (31.65%, n = 25). The answers for the social environment, social context, sociocultural context, or milieu were Yes (84.21%, n = 64), No (0.00%, n = 0), and Do Not Know/Cannot Say (15.79%, n = 12) (

Table 10. Answers to the question on the origin of the burnout (more than one response was possible) (students could click on both options) (n = 75 for first option; n = 76 for second option).

Origin of the Burnout	Yes	No	Do Not Know
“the body/mind not being ability normative (what many label as impairment),”	45.33% (n = 34)	29.33 (n = 22)	31.65% (n = 19)
the social environment, social context, sociocultural context, or milieu	84.21% (n = 64)	0% (n = 0)	15.79% (n = 12)

).

The following table outlines the responses for question 10, which asked about the social factors that could lead to burnout of DP/PWDs being allies to others (

Table 11. Question 10: Factors in the social environment that could increase the risk for burnout of DP/PWDs being allies to other DP/PWDs (n = 88 students responded).

Theme	Frequency	Subtheme	SubthemeFrequency	Relevant Quotes (Please Note, the Quotes Do Not Reflect the Full Quotes but the Part of the Quote Reflecting the Theme; Therefore, Below Are Mostly Not Complete Sentences)
Attitudinal Inaccessibility	51	Disablism experienced by the disabled ally in their life	20	poverty (n = 2); they themselves also face disablism; life burnout themselves; the social environment that makes them disabled can make it difficult for them to advocate; balance advocating for others while managing their own challenges; disabled allies also face inequality; emotional labor from advocating for another group while managing their own challenges; dealing with both the challenges and forms of oppression that accompany one’s own disability along with the challenges that individuals in other disabled groups may face; may also face own challenges; less employment; lack of education; balancing personal challenges; lack of access to health care; social support; disabled ally already requires extensively more energy because you usually do not have the opportunity to simply protest or access sites where protests are planned. You have to take extra precautions to get to areas; as well as use unique methods which allow you to be more effective in your protesting and so that you can be heard; being in another group comes with an extra social resistance and scorn that may make an ally more susceptible to burn out; that they experience social environment barriers on their own and advocating for another group could lead to burnout because you don’t have the privilege of “taking a break” from these barriers the same way that non-disabled people may have; disablism anxiety;
		Criticized	10	backlash (n = 2); harsh attitudes towards disabled individuals and its allies; societal backlash for why you are not advocating for your own group; disabled allies advocating for a disability group which is not theirs may be seen as them saying that disability faces more challenges than their own group; disability activists often face harassment online; bullying; harassment; social criticisms
		Ableism (could also be part of attitudinal inaccessibility)	6	systemic ableism; unfair treatment; societal expectations are poorly influencing the social environment; disabled allies in general face more challenges because they cannot peacefully be activists in every context; subjected to more ableism; these institutions often have strongly ingrained ableism, which makes it seem like allies are always up against an impassable wall
		Stigma, stereotype	4	society’s stigmas; stigma; stereotyping; societal stigma surrounding disability issues
		Disrespected	3	further marginalization and their messaging may be seen as less then because they themselves are also disabled; not being taken seriously; disabled activists will have to experience being generally dismissed by the public; still not being respected as an activist
		Discrimination	3	discrimination (n = 2); others discriminating against them or their actions
		Discrimination by other activists	1	marginalization within advocacy movements
		Conflict between disability groups	2	misunderstandings or conflicts between disability groups with different priorities; navigating intergroup conflicts
		Constantly fighting bias	2	are widely underestimated; “different” disability, society may think that they cannot relate or understand because they have different disabilities
Emotional and Psychological Toll	28	Emotional Issues	15	emotional labor from advocating for another group while managing their own challenges; resonating with the pain that they can relate to can bring them even more stress, since the things and issues they are fighting for are their lived experiences and reality; all the things mentioned before could be more personal or affect them on a deeper level; seeing your peers struggle despite your efforts; emotional labor; emotional labor from advocating for another group while managing their own challenges; feeling ally helplessness; emotional labor and compassion fatigue; emotional exhaustion; facing a unique intersection of personal experience and empathy/care for others; constant availability; trying to “fix” everything; emotional fatigue; juggling responsibilities; sense of abandoning your own disability group to advocate for another; emotional strain of fighting against systemic barriers
		Overworked	5	workload (n = 2); lot of work to change hard-set views and notions; overworked; that they experience social environment barriers on their own and advocating for another group could lead to burnout because you don’t have the privilege of “taking a break” from these barriers the same way that non-disabled people may have
		Double duty	4	supporting their own disability community while supporting another along; one must advocate for their own disadvantaged while also advocating for another; they have to both advocate for themselves and other disabled people; fighting against their own barriers while trying to be allies for another group
		Double feeling of burnout	2	shared feelings and perspectives involving things like accessibility, discrimination, etc.; can create a collective feeling of unity between these 2 groups that can result in shared feelings of burnout, frustration, and exhaustion;
		Having to also battle one’s own disablism	1	emotional labor from advocating for another group while managing their own challenges
		Constantly having to act	1	constantly challenging the government and policies for being non-inclusive
Support, Inclusion, and Recognition	25	Lack of support	11	lack of resources; not having the right resources to spread awareness; limited sources, lack of support, etc.; lack of support systems; finance; lack of community support or resources; this lack of community and mutual support can lead to feelings of isolation; lack of assistance and support; lack of funding from the government; social barriers; lack of supportive community or resources
		Negative reaction to activism activity	4	people not willing to listen; there may be a sense of betrayal from your community why you as someone from a disability group are advocating for a different disability group instead of your own; resistance; trying to create a difference when society is not willing to try
		Lack of recognition	4	the lack of acknowledgment for the spread of awareness from society; their ideas can be excused or ignored by society; it seems as though no one cares; indifference
		Excluded/exclusion between roles	3	exclusion (n = 2); feelings of isolation
		Personal connection	3	others oppress a specific group of people with disabilities; one not relating to you; it can still be taken personally
Systemic Complexity and Overload	13	Too complex, unfamiliar, lack of knowledge by disabled ally	5	people with disabilities that are in ally with other people with disabilities can have different circumstances involved when addressing issues like Global North and Global South; people with disabilities have different issues and conflicts that need to be addressed; the issue is so serious and complicated; they have more responsibility and are working with more people; meaning that they need to keep in mind more things
		Pressure	6	peer pressure; societal pressure; increasing expectation; pressure to support multiple communities; high expectations; the pressure put on them by a society that is harsh and unforgiving towards anything not seen as “normal”
		Work harder	1	work much harder
		Lack of representation	1	underrepresentation in these communities
Futility and Stagnation	9	No change	5	systemic resistance; seeing disabled individuals marginalized with little to no improvement; a sense of futility; nothing is happening; social change is a slow process that entails long-term devotion to the issue
		No change in lived reality	2	unchanging environment; need long time
		No impact	1	the lack of acknowledgment for the spread of awareness from society
		No progress	1	no progress
Lack of physical accessibility	8		8	they are often unable to access specific places; lack of transportation; the environment not being accessible to the person; public barriers that make it hard to participate in movements; and unaccessible environments; disabled ally already requires extensively more energy because you usually do not have the opportunity to simply protest or access sites where protests are planned. You have to take extra precautions to get to areas; as well as use unique methods which allow you to be more effective in your protesting and so that you can be heard. Being in another group comes with an extra social resistance and scorn that may make an ally more susceptible to burn out; facing difficulty even accessing locations which they can spread public awareness about personal struggles

).

As to Table 11, which covers the social factors identified as increasing the danger of ally burnout of DP/PWD as allies, the following themes and subthemes were found.

The theme attitudinal inaccessibility was mentioned (n = 52) times with the sub-themes being disablism experienced by the disabled ally in their life (n = 20); criticized (n = 10); ableism (could also be part of attitudinal inaccessibility) (n = 7); stigma, stereotype n = 4 times each; disrespected and discrimination (n = 3) each; conflict between disability groups and constantly fighting bias (n = 2) each; and discrimination by other activists (n = 1).

The theme emotional and psychological toll was mentioned (n = 32) times with the sub-themes being mentioned: emotional issues (n = 17); overworked (n = 5); double duty (n = 4); double feeling of burnout (n = 3) and having to also battle one’s own disablism and constantly having to act (n = 1) each.

The theme support, inclusion, and recognition were mentioned (n = 25) times with the following sub-themes: lack of support (n = 11); negative reaction to activism activity (n = 4); and lack of recognition, excluded/exclusion between roles, and personal connection (n = 3) each.

The theme systemic complexity and overload was mentioned (n = 14) times with the following sub-themes: too complex, unfamiliar, lack of knowledge by disabled ally and pressure (n = 6) each and work harder and lack of representation (n = 1) each.

The theme futility and stagnation were mentioned (n = 8) times with the following sub-themes: no change (n = 5); no change in lived reality (n = 1); no impact (n = 1); and no progress (n = 1).

The theme lack of physical accessibility was mentioned (n = 7) times.

4. Discussion

4.1. General Reflection

Many expectations of allyship in general are mentioned in the academic literature, [6], which include supporting social change [35], lifelong learning [36,37], not being defined by the ally [36], making use of one’s privilege [36,38], being aware of general privilege [35,37], giving voice to the marginalized [36,37,38,39,40,41], considering the power in language [39], understanding one’s positionality [35,39], performing research [38,39,40], and taking action [38,39,40,42]. Being an ally of DP/PWDs is described with many of the same characteristics, with some noted to be specific to the case of DP/PWDs [6], such as to consider the power in language [43,44], to develop a nuanced perspective on intersectional ableism and allyship [41,43], to bring internalized ableism and privilege to light [41,43], to be aware of ability privileges [45], to dismantle ableism [43], to challenge ableist practices [43], and to understand the concept of vulnerability [46]. It is also flagged that it is important to understand that DP/PWDs are not a homogenous group [43,46]. Our participants’ answers to the question that asked what it involves being an ally to DP/PWDs (Table 3) reflect many of the expectations noted in the literature above, such as being activists to start with (the theme of advocacy and action was mentioned n = 131 times), to amplify disabled voices, shifting behavior towards DP/PWDs (n = 12 each), and self-reflection and privilege (n = 7).

Given that allies ought to be activists they are in danger of activist burnout.

“Activist burnout has been defined as when long-term activism-related stressors deteriorate activists’ physical or emotional health or sense of connectedness to their movements, impacting their effectiveness or abilities to remain engaged” and “Making matters worse, burnout begets burnout, as movement work is taken up by fewer people, who begin to burn out, engage less effectively, and take out their hopelessness on fellow activists” [9] (p. 364).

Many causes of activist burnout have been mentioned in the academic literature, such as “being different from the norm [6,55,56,57]; unreasonable expectations [56]; working too much [56]; working on issues around identity [56,57]; working outside the system [57]; the persistence of sexism, racism, and other oppressions [6]; emotional labour [6]; the way one’s lived experience outside the activism impacts the activism [6]; and treatment of activists in organizations [6]” cited from [7] (p. 3).

The answers of our participants in relation to what they see as social factors in the burnout of allies of DP/PWDs (Table 7) and DP/PWDs being allies of others (Table 11) reflect many of the factors noted in the academic literature as leading to activist burnout.

Finally, the answers of our participants also noted the few problems allies of DP/PWDs face noted in the literature: seeing DP/PWDs as homogenous [43,46], the danger of internalizing ableism [43], the hierarchy among oppressed groups [46], and the “appropriation of the voice” of the oppressed [58] (p. 8) (we made the citations live, so these are different numbers than in the original quote).

Recent scoping reviews found no source that engaged specifically with ally burnout [6] and activist burnout [7] in relation to DP/PWDs. The answers of our participants suggest that this is a problem and a gap that needs to be filled. In the remainder of the discussion section, we focus on specific areas.

If we compare our answers given in relation to non-disabled people being allies and disabled people being allies the numbers are similar, noting a 77.11% and 81.93% a yes for non-disabled and disabled allies, respectively, whereby the body/mind and the social environment had both higher values of yes for disabled allies over non-disabled allies. Given that disabled people experience so many forms of disablism as evident in the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and that the participants were critical disability studies students who by default assume that the lived reality of disabled people is problematic, the answers make sense. However, the fact that, in general, the numbers of yes for ally burnout for both groups were so high (the topic was not covered in class yet at the time the survey was due) suggests that the students might have experienced problems in their own allyship efforts or heard of them. It might also reflect that many of the students might have joined the program because of having a sibling with a disability and they might have encountered issue as being allies of their sibling. This might be a good study to focus on siblings as allies given that,

“parents and siblings of DCY (DCY = disabled children and youth) face being stigmatized because of the ableist judgment of their DCY (H. H. Chang, 2009; Gautam & Bhadra, 2022; Gray, 1993; La Croix, 2013; Njelesani, 2019; Scavarda & Scambler, 2025; Shapiro, 1988; Thomas, 2021) and they face attitudinal and other societal barriers in being advocates for their DCY (Dee-Price et al., 2024, p. 2639)” [92] (p. 6).

If we compare the social factors identified for the non-disabled being allies of DP/PWDs (Table 7) and DP/PWDs as allies of other DP/PWDs (Table 11), many social factors were the same. Attitudinal inaccessibility was one factor that was much higher with disabled versus non-disabled people being allies. This makes sense given that this is a critical disability studies class, which has as a premise that DP/PWDs experience many attitudinal issues. Some other themes higher for the DP/PWD allies were double duty and similar themes. This, again, makes sense as one can presuppose, given the class, that students assume that the disabled ally has to deal with their own problem and the problem of the group/topic they are allying with.

One social factor that was more prevalent for the non-disabled ally than the DP/PWDs ally was the lack of knowledge (although they still were seen as having lack of knowledge). This again makes sense as one can assume that DP/PWDs have more knowledge on the topic of being an ally of DP/PWDs. However, it might be useful to also study this aspect in more detail in other studies as the level of knowledge DP/PWDs have of the problems DP/PWDs face, in general, and DP/PWDs of other body/mind characteristics might vary significantly.

Lack of progress and lack of support was flagged for both groups.

4.2. Attitudinal Inaccessibility, Lack of Support, and Lack of Progress

From this study, we identified that the main challenges reported for non-disabled allies of DP/PWDs (Table 7) and for DP/PWDs acting as allies of other DP/PWDs (Table 11) largely stem from attitudes toward DP/PWDs and their allies and negative perceptions of both DP/PWDs and their allies.

As to non-disabled people being allies of DP/PDWs (Table 7), the theme of attitudinal inaccessibility was mentioned (n = 29) times, with the following sub-themes: being criticized (n = 8); ableism, disablism, and constantly having to act (n = 4 each); stigma, constantly fighting, attitudinal inaccessibility, and discrimination (n = 3 each); barriers (n = 2), and constantly fighting bias, and microaggression (n = 1 each).

As to DP/PDWs being allies (Table 11), the theme of attitudinal inaccessibility was mentioned (n = 52) times, with the sub-themes being disablism experienced by the disabled ally in their life (n = 20), being criticized (n = 10), ableism (could also be part of attitudinal inaccessibility) (n = 7), stigma and stereotype (n = 4 times each), disrespected and discrimination (n = 3 each), conflict between disability groups and constantly fighting bias (n = 2 each), and discrimination by other activists (n = 1).

Another prevalent theme was the lack of support and emotional toll.

As to non-disabled people being allies of DP/PDWs (Table 7), the theme of lack of support and recognition was mentioned (n = 19) times, with the following sub-themes: lack of support (n = 11), negative reaction to activism activity (n = 5), lack of recognition (n = 2), and imbalance of power (n = 1). The theme of emotional and psychological toll was mentioned (n = 15) times, with the following sub-themes: emotional issues (n = 11), overworked (n = 3), and self-care (n = 1).

As to DP/PDWs being allies (Table 11), the theme of support, inclusion, and recognition was mentioned (n = 25) times, with the following sub-themes: lack of support (n = 11), negative reaction to activism activity (n = 4), and lack of recognition, excluded/exclusion between roles, and personal connection (n = 3) each.

The theme of emotional and psychological toll was mentioned (n = 32) times, with the following sub-themes: emotional issues (n = 17), overworked (n = 5), double duty (n = 4), double feeling of burnout (n = 3), and having to also battle one’s own disablism and constantly having to act (n = 1 each).

A third prevalent theme was the lack of progress.

As to non-disabled people being allies of DP/PDWs (Table 7), the theme of futility and burnout from inaction was mentioned (n = 18) times, with the following sub-themes: no progress (n = 16) and no impact (n = 2).

As to DP/PDWs being allies (Table 11), the theme of futility and stagnation was mentioned (n = 8) times, with the following sub-themes: no change (n = 5); no change in lived reality (n = 1); no impact (n = 1); and no progress (n = 1).

These three themes suggest that many non-disabled people might avoid being allies of DP/PWDs, and DP/PWDs might avoid being allies of others, especially if they are in precarious situations themselves, which includes experiencing disablism (systemic discrimination in their daily lives). It also suggests that if there are so many negative reactions that the ones who cause the problems for allies of DP/PWDs very likely will not be allies themselves. What our findings also suggest is that some of the problems might be caused by other activists (Table 7 and Table 11), which fits with various studies around the reality of disabled activists within environmental activism [24,25,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100,101,102]. Many of the attitudinal problems our students highlighted might be based on the narratives about DP/PWDs people are exposed to. One cause for the issue students suggested, that allies of DP/PWDs are not respected, could be that many problems DP/PWDs face are invisible in the public domain, and so, if an ally raises the topic, people are blindsided.

As noted earlier, these themes highlighted above provide an alignment with social stress theory. As others have argued, the social environment itself often produces stressors that undermine both activism and allyship [49,50]. Our participants’ responses illustrate how ally burnout can be understood not simply as individual fatigue but as a predictable outcome of hostile social contexts, entrenched ableism and disablism, and the cumulative demands of emotional labor. Understanding ally burnout also requires attending to the broader political and social landscapes in which activists operate. Many participants juggle commitments across multiple movements, and these overlapping responsibilities can intensify stress, showing that burnout emerges from systemic pressures rather than isolated individual experiences [9,16]. In this way, ally burnout can be reframed as a systemic issue rather than an individual failing. Not only that—one reason for activist burnout noted in the literature is the competition between movements.

At the same time, their responses also highlighted how such expectations can become overwhelming, especially if there is no support and one sees no progress.

Considering our findings underscore the further need for supportive structures, activist organizations and community groups should work towards reducing ally and activist burnout in general by recognizing the labor within allyship, and by providing a supportive atmosphere for disabled allies and allies of DP/PWDs and move towards cultivating an environment of solidarity between allies, both disabled and non-disabled, so they can learn from each other and tackle the problems together without generating new ways of oppression. Without these structures, DP/PWDs as allies and allies of DP/PWDs will be at risk of ally burnout. This tension suggests that allyship and disability studies education need to not only emphasize responsibility and accountability but also sustainability and collective care. In this context, the care that is provided refers to both self-care in understanding the emotional and physical toll of allyship on an individual level, and the greater collective care, where the overall responsibility of sustainable allyship can be shared over being placed solely on the individual. The integration of practices of care within allyship can acknowledge that burnout is a personal yet also systemic burden, and that caring for each other is a critical component of long-term and authentic allyship. Framing allyship through a disability studies lens underscores that care is not peripheral but central. It affirms interdependence, challenges individualistic models of activism, and makes clear that sustaining movements requires attention to the wellbeing of all involved.

Our finding that the lack of progress is a danger for burnout also demands specific attention because to counter that expectation and to give people the strength to be in it for the long haul is important, given that the discrimination DP/PWDs experience has been going on for a long time, that very few of the existing problems have been solved, and that at the same time new challenges are constantly emerging (see artificial intelligence and quantum technologies for the latest ones).

4.3. The Issue of Intersectionality and Disability Justice

Intersectionality is flagged as an important aspect of allyship [43,47,48,49,103], the concept of disability justice has as one main pillar intersectionality [43,50,51,52,53], and disability justice and intersectional allyship are closely linked [43]. A recent education tool of how to teach about the intersectionality of DP/PWDsusing an intersectional pedagogy framework gave examples of many intersectional identities that disabled people can be part of. It also highlighted the specific issue of a disabled person having more than one body/mind difference whereby each of these differences might be differently perceived by others and shape non-body/-mind originating intersectionalities in different ways [50]. Our participants flagged intersectionality, such as the “rights for disabled Indigenous people”, as an activist topic for allies of DP/PWDs that contained a high danger of burnout for allies (Table 8). They also saw it as a role of allies to educate others on intersectionality (Table 3). These findings outline a double burden, in the sense that allies are not only asked to navigate disablism but should also respond to the multiple intersections of the negative actions based on ability judgments (disablism) with racism, settler casteism, colonialism, sexism, and other forms of systemic oppression, thus expanding the scope and overall intensity of the allyship conducted, increasing the overall vulnerability to burnout. Indeed, using the ally lens, one could say that the term “intersectionality” was coined by Crenshaw [104] to highlight that people with two marginalized identities (e.g., women of color) do not necessarily have allies among the people that only belong to one of the marginalized identities (being a woman or being a man of color). The same is true for disabled people. For example, it is well described that disabled women were often ignored by non-disabled women [105] (for other examples of intersectional conflict experienced by DP/PWDs see [50,106]).

“Indicating the importance of the intersectionality of different forms of oppression, it is argued that the systemic disablism experiences by disabled people “were exacerbated by sexism, racism, non-citizenship status, and/or fatphobia (weight shaming)” [50] (p. 8)” [6] (p. 3).

As such the very understanding of disability justice and with that intersectionality and allyship demands that care within allyship becomes a method for resisting the compounding effects of disablism, racism, sexism, and other oppressions on both DP/PWDs and their allies. Embedding care into allyship therefore offers not only a strategy for preventing burnout, but also a vision of sustainable and justice-oriented collaboration that aligns with the broader goals of disability studies, disability rights, and disability justice.

4.4. The Forty Statements from Table 4

Within that study, the author uses the Q-Sort to identify three broad orientations to allyship using the forty statements [54]: (1) Accountable Collaborators (yellow), (2) Amical Empathic (green), and (3) Universal Design Advocates (purple) (Table 12). Each group is characterized by different priorities and challenges.

(1)

Accountable Collaborators: emphasize responsibility, accountability, and overall structural change;

(2)

Amical Empathic: prioritize empathy, relationships, and interpersonal connection;

(3)

Universal Design Advocates: emphasize accessibility, design, and inclusion across environments.

There is a further categorization associated with the Q-Sort—the number values +5, +4, −4, −5 outline the strength and direction of association between a statement and the given allyship type. The +5 and +4 statements most strongly describe that allyship type and −5 and −4 statements are the least associated with that given allyship type (Table 12 below). To illustrate how participants’ responses mapped onto the Q-Sort framework, we highlight below (Table 12) a selection of items where students expressed especially strong consensus (positive or negative).

Table 12. Survey responses with Q-Sort (1) Accountable Collaborators (yellow), (2) Amical Empathic (green), and (3) Universal Design Advocates (purple).

#	Question	I Do Not Agree		I Agree Weakly		I Agree Strongly		I Cannot Say/Have No Opinion		Total	Q-Sort Value Used in the Study (Only Highlighting +5, + 4, −4, and −5)
29	29. Advocates for all community settings to be inherently barrier-free.	0.00%	0	2.47%	2	93.83%	76	3.70%	3	81	+5 Universal
35	35. Advocates for all workplace settings to be inherently barrier-free.	0.00%	0	3.61%	3	92.77%	77	3.61%	3	83	−4 +5
5	5. Works to ensure people with disability can access the services they legally deserve.	0.00%	0	2.41%	2	90.36%	75	7.23%	6	83
19	19. Believes persons w/disability when they communicate about their experiences.	1.20%	1	3.61%	3	90.36%	75	4.82%	4	83	+4
26	26. Values the benefits of diverse perspectives including people w/disability.	0.00%	0	3.66%	3	90.24%	74	6.10%	5	82	+5 +4
1	1. Supports flexible schedules so persons w/disability can meet shifting needs.	0.00%	0	4.82%	4	87.95%	73	7.23%	6	83	+4
15	15. Educates oneself re: lived experiences of people w/disability.	0.00%	0	4.82%	4	87.95%	73	7.23%	6	83
23	23. Knows people w/disability are individuals who may have shared experiences of discrimination.	2.41%	2	6.02%	5	87.95%	73	3.61%	3	83	−4
40	40. Knows that disability is one among many enriching attributes of personal identity.	1.20%	1	6.02%	5	87.95%	73	4.82%	4	83
25	25. Advocates for all learning settings to be inherently barrier-free.	0.00%	0	7.23%	6	86.75%	72	6.02%	5	83	+4
16	16. Knows that experiences of disability are multifaceted.	0.00%	0	3.61%	3	85.54%	71	10.84%	9	83	+4
31	31. Understands disability as a natural expression of human diversity rather than as a problem.	2.41%	2	4.82%	4	85.54%	71	7.23%	6	83
34	34. Creates opportunities to advocate for disability rights.	0.00%	0	8.43%	7	85.54%	71	6.02%	5	83	−4 −4
3	3. Accepts responsibility for educating self and others re: enabled privilege.	0.00%	0	7.23%	6	84.34%	70	8.43%	7	83	+4
21	21. Knows we all need to unlearn non-disabled = superior or normal.	1.20%	1	7.23%	6	84.34%	70	7.23%	6	83
37	37. Knows importance of collaboration w/persons w/disability to undo disablism.	1.22%	1	7.32%	6	84.15%	69	7.32%	6	82	+5
20	20. Understands social norms give unearned advantage to the non-disabled.	0.00%	0	6.02%	5	83.13%	69	10.84%	9	83	+5
33	33. Recognizes racism, sexism, etc. influence experiences of disablism/enabled privilege.	1.20%	1	7.23%	6	83.13%	69	8.43%	7	83	+5
14	14. Consults persons experiencing disability/disablism before taking action(s).	1.20%	1	8.43%	7	81.93%	68	8.43%	7	83
27	27. Takes actions to dismantle disablism even when doing so reduces one’s own social power.	1.20%	1	4.82%	4	81.93%	68	12.05%	10	83
28	28. Knows that social stigmas constitute chronic stressors for persons experiencing disability.	0.00%	0	8.43%	7	81.93%	68	9.64%	8	83	+4
22	22. Networks with groups working for disability rights.	0.00%	0	9.88%	8	81.48%	66	8.64%	7	81	−5 −4
30	30. Knows that non-disabled people are often unaware of their enabled privilege.	0.00%	0	10.84%	9	80.72%	67	8.43%	7	83	+4
36	36. Is open to personal critique regarding disability/disablism/enabled privilege.	2.41%	2	6.02%	5	79.52%	66	12.05%	10	83	+4
24	24. Networks with groups providing services to people experiencing disability.	0.00%	0	13.25%	11	77.11%	64	9.64%	8	83	−5
11	11. Develops friendships with people experiencing disability/disablism.	2.44%	2	13.41%	11	74.39%	61	9.76%	8	82
17	17. Knows that being non-disabled influences one’s identity.	1.20%	1	7.23%	6	73.49%	61	18.07%	15	83
13	13. Empathizes with people experiencing disability/disablism.	1.20%	1	15.66%	13	72.29%	60	10.84%	9	83
18	18. Knows to speak for oneself rather than for persons with disability.	10.98%	9	8.54%	7	71.95%	59	8.54%	7	82
9	9. Is committed to leveraging personal privilege to undo systems of unearned advantage.	0.00%	0	18.07%	15	71.08%	59	10.84%	9	83
12	12. Seeks business relationships w/people w/disability.	6.02%	5	13.25%	11	67.47%	56	13.25%	11	83
7	7. Advocates for charitable groups as providers of needed services for people w/disability.	2.41%	2	18.07%	15	66.27%	55	13.25%	11	83	−4
10	10. Provides sympathetic support for people experiencing disability.	13.25%	11	14.46%	12	62.65%	52	9.64%	8	83	−4
8	8. Experiences distress about unearned disadvantages for people w/disability.	2.41%	2	18.07%	15	61.45%	51	18.07%	15	83
39	39. Provides direct assistance to persons experiencing disability.	4.82%	4	19.28%	16	60.24%	50	15.66%	13	83	+5
4	4. Works as a service provider to people experiencing disability.	10.84%	9	26.51%	22	50.60%	42	12.05%	10	83	−4 −5
38	38. Knows that people experiencing disability often need to rely on experts acting on their behalf.	19.28%	16	15.66%	13	48.19%	40	16.87%	14	83	−5
32	32. Knows that some people overcome their impairments through heroic effort.	15.66%	13	21.69%	18	39.76%	33	22.89%	19	83	−5
6	6. Experiences distress about one’s own unearned advantages.	16.87%	14	21.69%	18	38.55%	32	22.89%	19	83	−5
2	2. Understands that disability is caused by a health condition.	22.89%	19	28.92%	24	28.92%	24	19.28%	16	83	−4

Table 12. Survey responses with Q-Sort (1) Accountable Collaborators (yellow), (2) Amical Empathic (green), and (3) Universal Design Advocates (purple).

#	Question	I Do Not Agree		I Agree Weakly		I Agree Strongly		I Cannot Say/Have No Opinion		Total	Q-Sort Value Used in the Study (Only Highlighting +5, + 4, −4, and −5)
29	29. Advocates for all community settings to be inherently barrier-free.	0.00%	0	2.47%	2	93.83%	76	3.70%	3	81	+5 Universal
35	35. Advocates for all workplace settings to be inherently barrier-free.	0.00%	0	3.61%	3	92.77%	77	3.61%	3	83	−4 +5
5	5. Works to ensure people with disability can access the services they legally deserve.	0.00%	0	2.41%	2	90.36%	75	7.23%	6	83
19	19. Believes persons w/disability when they communicate about their experiences.	1.20%	1	3.61%	3	90.36%	75	4.82%	4	83	+4
26	26. Values the benefits of diverse perspectives including people w/disability.	0.00%	0	3.66%	3	90.24%	74	6.10%	5	82	+5 +4
1	1. Supports flexible schedules so persons w/disability can meet shifting needs.	0.00%	0	4.82%	4	87.95%	73	7.23%	6	83	+4
15	15. Educates oneself re: lived experiences of people w/disability.	0.00%	0	4.82%	4	87.95%	73	7.23%	6	83
23	23. Knows people w/disability are individuals who may have shared experiences of discrimination.	2.41%	2	6.02%	5	87.95%	73	3.61%	3	83	−4
40	40. Knows that disability is one among many enriching attributes of personal identity.	1.20%	1	6.02%	5	87.95%	73	4.82%	4	83
25	25. Advocates for all learning settings to be inherently barrier-free.	0.00%	0	7.23%	6	86.75%	72	6.02%	5	83	+4
16	16. Knows that experiences of disability are multifaceted.	0.00%	0	3.61%	3	85.54%	71	10.84%	9	83	+4
31	31. Understands disability as a natural expression of human diversity rather than as a problem.	2.41%	2	4.82%	4	85.54%	71	7.23%	6	83
34	34. Creates opportunities to advocate for disability rights.	0.00%	0	8.43%	7	85.54%	71	6.02%	5	83	−4 −4
3	3. Accepts responsibility for educating self and others re: enabled privilege.	0.00%	0	7.23%	6	84.34%	70	8.43%	7	83	+4
21	21. Knows we all need to unlearn non-disabled = superior or normal.	1.20%	1	7.23%	6	84.34%	70	7.23%	6	83
37	37. Knows importance of collaboration w/persons w/disability to undo disablism.	1.22%	1	7.32%	6	84.15%	69	7.32%	6	82	+5
20	20. Understands social norms give unearned advantage to the non-disabled.	0.00%	0	6.02%	5	83.13%	69	10.84%	9	83	+5
33	33. Recognizes racism, sexism, etc. influence experiences of disablism/enabled privilege.	1.20%	1	7.23%	6	83.13%	69	8.43%	7	83	+5
14	14. Consults persons experiencing disability/disablism before taking action(s).	1.20%	1	8.43%	7	81.93%	68	8.43%	7	83
27	27. Takes actions to dismantle disablism even when doing so reduces one’s own social power.	1.20%	1	4.82%	4	81.93%	68	12.05%	10	83
28	28. Knows that social stigmas constitute chronic stressors for persons experiencing disability.	0.00%	0	8.43%	7	81.93%	68	9.64%	8	83	+4
22	22. Networks with groups working for disability rights.	0.00%	0	9.88%	8	81.48%	66	8.64%	7	81	−5 −4
30	30. Knows that non-disabled people are often unaware of their enabled privilege.	0.00%	0	10.84%	9	80.72%	67	8.43%	7	83	+4
36	36. Is open to personal critique regarding disability/disablism/enabled privilege.	2.41%	2	6.02%	5	79.52%	66	12.05%	10	83	+4
24	24. Networks with groups providing services to people experiencing disability.	0.00%	0	13.25%	11	77.11%	64	9.64%	8	83	−5
11	11. Develops friendships with people experiencing disability/disablism.	2.44%	2	13.41%	11	74.39%	61	9.76%	8	82
17	17. Knows that being non-disabled influences one’s identity.	1.20%	1	7.23%	6	73.49%	61	18.07%	15	83
13	13. Empathizes with people experiencing disability/disablism.	1.20%	1	15.66%	13	72.29%	60	10.84%	9	83
18	18. Knows to speak for oneself rather than for persons with disability.	10.98%	9	8.54%	7	71.95%	59	8.54%	7	82
9	9. Is committed to leveraging personal privilege to undo systems of unearned advantage.	0.00%	0	18.07%	15	71.08%	59	10.84%	9	83
12	12. Seeks business relationships w/people w/disability.	6.02%	5	13.25%	11	67.47%	56	13.25%	11	83
7	7. Advocates for charitable groups as providers of needed services for people w/disability.	2.41%	2	18.07%	15	66.27%	55	13.25%	11	83	−4
10	10. Provides sympathetic support for people experiencing disability.	13.25%	11	14.46%	12	62.65%	52	9.64%	8	83	−4
8	8. Experiences distress about unearned disadvantages for people w/disability.	2.41%	2	18.07%	15	61.45%	51	18.07%	15	83
39	39. Provides direct assistance to persons experiencing disability.	4.82%	4	19.28%	16	60.24%	50	15.66%	13	83	+5
4	4. Works as a service provider to people experiencing disability.	10.84%	9	26.51%	22	50.60%	42	12.05%	10	83	−4 −5
38	38. Knows that people experiencing disability often need to rely on experts acting on their behalf.	19.28%	16	15.66%	13	48.19%	40	16.87%	14	83	−5
32	32. Knows that some people overcome their impairments through heroic effort.	15.66%	13	21.69%	18	39.76%	33	22.89%	19	83	−5
6	6. Experiences distress about one’s own unearned advantages.	16.87%	14	21.69%	18	38.55%	32	22.89%	19	83	−5
2	2. Understands that disability is caused by a health condition.	22.89%	19	28.92%	24	28.92%	24	19.28%	16	83	−4

Our participants’ responses to the forty Q-Sort statements (Table 4 and Table 12) revealed a strong agreement with many of the expectations of allies in the literature. Over 90% “strongly agreed” with several core items, such as advocating for barrier-free community (statements 25, 29, 35), believing DP/PWDs when they share experiences (statement 19), and valuing diverse perspectives (statement 26), that reflect key commitments across all three allyship types. Many of the expectations of an accountable collaborator identified in [54] are reflected in the answers of our participants, as many of the statements associated with the “Accountable Collaborator”, such as dismantling disablism, leveraging privilege, and acting despite loss of social power, were all strongly endorsed.

The expectations for the three main ally categories come with different burnout dangers. The burnout dangers highlighted by our participants suggest that the (1) Accountable Collaborator is at the highest risk of ally burnout, given that in [54] it is noted that the Accountable Collaborator is the one with the highest intensity and breadth of their commitments.

4.5. The Issue of Ableism, Disablism, and Anxiety

Challenging ableism was seen as one expectation of being an ally (n = 16) (Table 3). “Ableism” and “disablism” were also often mentioned by participants as a problem for allies and a topic to be addressed that could lead to burnout (Table 7, Table 8 and Table 11). These sentiments of our participants fit with that the allyship literature around disabled people asks the ally,

“to develop a nuanced perspective on intersectional ableism and allyship [59,68], to bring internalized ableism and privilege to light [59,68], to be aware of ability privileges [69], to dismantle ableism [68] and to challenge ableist practices [68]” [6] (p. 3),

In the literature, ableism [107], systemic ableism [108], internalized ableism [109] are mentioned as social stressors, and that disablism (the systemic discrimination based on negative ability judgments) that DP/PWDs experience is seen to lead to disability burnout [110] as in disablism burnout [7]. The social stressor of disablism can be expected to lead to disablism anxiety [111], as one consequence that people might try to avoid certain situations where they encounter disablism, which in turn means that many might avoid being allies of DP/PWDs or DP/PWDs being allies of others in order to avoid disablism. Our findings suggest that it might be useful to engage with disablism as a social stressor on allyship within the academic literature on social stress, a linkage so far not being made.

This further stigma outlined by the structures of ableism and disablism extend towards those who care for and are in relation to DP/PWDs. For example, within familial systems, parents and siblings are often the first and main ally of a disabled person. At the same time, it is well reported that parents of disabled children face many social stressors, such as being stigmatized because they have a disabled child [112,113,114,115,116,117,118] and that they face attitudinal and other societal barriers in being advocates for their child. Many of the answers our participants gave could apply to siblings and parents (family was the second highest group of allies mentioned in Table 2) and indicate the danger of ally burnout of parents and siblings of DP/PWDs and the danger of disablism anxiety, which could lead to activism anxiety and ally anxiety, decreasing the willingness or ability to be an ally due to wanting to avoid or being overwhelmed by the social stressor of disablism associated with allyship. Although our study does not outline sibling identity within the demographic questions, it seems reasonable to assume that students that are siblings of DP/PWDs were present in our sample given that the students were recruited from a disability studies program. Our findings suggest that it would be important that social stress studies look at the linkage of disablism anxiety and allyship in general, but in particular in relation to parents and siblings as allies of DP/PWDs. It would also be worthwhile to see how the disablism a disabled person experiences impacts them being an ally of their family members, such as feeling they belong if they see themselves only as a burden and not someone who can support family members in their needs as ally.

Furthermore, it might be useful to engage in depth with ability-based concepts. Within disability studies and the three strands of ability-based studies [67,77,78,79,80,81,82,83], many ability-based concepts have been generated to question ability-based norms and conflicts [79,119,120,121,122,123]. All of the ability-based concepts could be used by our participants to make people understand ability-judgment-based problems DP/PWDs face and to highlight that other marginalized groups are also ability-judged and that abilities are often used to justify negative -isms such as racism or sexism [77,78,119,124,125,126,127] cited in [128]. Using the ability-based judgment framework might allow our participants to build bridges between allies of DP/PWDs and other marginalized groups.

The ability-based concepts are also very useful for understanding “attitudes that exist toward individuals with disabilities and sound suggestions for transforming negative attitudes into positive ones” [129] (p. 67), to understand disability justice [45] and ability-judgment-based justice [79,130] and to unmask ability-judgment-based conflicts. Ability-judgment-based conflicts and injustices exist between privileged and marginalized groups in general, as ability expectations are often used as a tool by one group to marginalize another group [77,78], between disabled and non-disabled people, but also in between different disability groups as the literature around hierarchies of disabilities suggests [55,131,132,133,134,135,136,137]. The ability-judgment-based concepts suggest various ability-judgment-based problems that authentic allies must face that might lead to stress and burnout.

4.6. The Issue of Being Knowledgeable and Educating Others

Allies ought to be knowledgeable on disability issues and the problems they face [46,56]. This was also flagged as an expectation by our participants. The theme of knowledge and awareness was mentioned (n = 102) times, with the following sub-themes: educate yourself (n = 31), listen to disabled people (n = 18), educate oneself on specific topic (n = 21), educate others (n = 9), be a knowledge-producer (n = 1), educate others on specific topic (n = 7), and spreading awareness (n = 15) (Table 3).

However, this is much easier said than done. It has been flagged for a long time that data on many aspects of the lived reality of DP/PWDs are missing (e.g., [6,138,139,140,141,142,143]), including those around the issue of burnout [7]. And as stated elsewhere “…given not only the vast differences in the lived experience between DP/PWD but also the lack or bias of data on many problems, especially emerging problems, DP/PWD face, such as artificial intelligence [33,144,145], environmental issues [25,28,57,97,98,99,146] and emergency and disaster preparedness, planning and management [147,148] and the constant appearance of new problems, for an ally to become knowledgeable is a vast task. As such, data must be generated that engages with the problems of knowledge acquisition” [6] (p. 21).

In extension of this knowledge, allies are also expected to educate others. That expectation was also flagged by our participants as one main factor for burning out and this factor for burning out might become more prevalent. One area that has recently emerged is the increasing use of chatbots to obtain knowledge. Given that chatbot responses can only reflect what data exist, one needs a very sophisticated prompt strategy to get the most out of chatbots, which by itself requires that one already has the knowledge. Furthermore, it was noted in a recent study [149] that “for the group that relied on LLM products like the three chatbots I used to generate the below material versus the group that used search engines and the ones that used their brain only: (1) neural connectivity was the lowest for the LLM group (critical thinking), (2) ownership feeling of the generated output was the lowest, and (3) recall of what one found was the lowest” [130] (p. 39). The result from [149] and the well-known reality of lack of data production in relation to the social reality of DP/PWDs suggest that allies might face an ever-increasing problem of burnout due to the lack of knowledge others have but also that they face resistance to their allyship due to the lack of knowledge of others, something our participants also flagged.

4.7. Topics for Activism Mentioned

Table 8 revealed that our participants saw many different topics as being particularly dangerous in causing burnout. Part of this could be due to the negative reactions towards the views of disabled people on these topics; for some of the other topics it could be due to the specific knowledge needed. Many of the answers given were lived reality topics, which can play themselves out on any given topic, such as the topics of “accessibility” or “discrimination”. The survey did not ask why participants felt a given topic contains the high danger of burnout. The survey also did not ask for topics of advocacy needed in general. This could be performed in other studies. However, the answers given suggest that there is a need for many allies in general, including allies in specific subject areas. Given that allies of DP/PWDs have to come from so many lived realities, it is even more important to generate data on ally burnout and to develop best practices to reduce the danger of ally burnout.

5. Conclusions, Future Research, and Implications

Given the results from a 2023 scoping review [6], many foundational studies are needed that cover ally burnout and the reality on the ground for allies and the difficulties of being an ally of DP/PWDs and being an ally of others as a DP/PWDs. This study aimed to contribute to filling the gap.

Our findings could be used as a starting point for other studies. We covered disability studies students, students that come with certain mindsets into their degree. Disability studies students engage with the social problems DP/PWDs face in order to make a positive difference in the lives of DP/PWDs [21]. They see themselves as allies of DP/PWDs [20] and want to raise awareness about the problematic lived reality of DP/PWDs [22]. It would be interesting to see how students who are from non-disability studies degrees, from other disability studies degrees, or from graduate degrees answer the questions. One could also ask the questions of different groups of DP/PWDs to see whether they answer the questions differently. Then, one could ask participants whether students or other people, members of Disabled People Organizations, other social justice groups, and members of the public at large what they see as disability topics in need of advocacy. This would reveal the breadth of allies DP/PWDs need in general and what subject matter expertise is needed. One could also ask all the groups as to what topics they think DP/PWDs could be allies of others.

To perform many studies with different participants is important, as DP/PWDs come from numerous different social realities and body/mind characteristics that influence what problems they encounter, what solutions are possible, and what resistance they might face. Then, there are many forms of intersectionality DP/PWDs can be part of [50,106], which in turn impact the problems they face, and with that impact also who might want to be an ally of DP/PWDs and the problems allies face and what appropriate and meaningful allyship should look like.

Then, one could use the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) [1] as an audit tool to ascertain what topics allies might be interested in or see themselves in a position to get involved in. The CRPD is in essence a document of action items [50]. The CRPD wordings suggest over 150 action items (wording listed in [50] (pp. 68–77)). These action items are not only to be performed by government, but they need the action of society at large and institutions within society, such as educational institutions. In other words, they are all potential action items for allies. One could give these action items to participants and ask them which of them they think they could be an ally for and which ones they think they can involve themselves in.

At the same time, our findings suggest that conversations about allyship must go beyond responsibility and accountability to include sustainability and care. Future research should explore how both self-care (acknowledging the personal toll of allyship) and collective care (ensuring the work is shared and supported by communities and institutions) can be integrated into allyship practice. Embedding care within educational, activist, and institutional contexts reframes allyship not as endless sacrifice but as sustainable engagement that prioritizes wellbeing alongside justice.

As to educational implications, students ought to be change agents [150,151,152,153,154,155,156,157] and active citizens [151,158,159,160,161,162,163,164,165,166,167], which is linked to being activists and should include being allies of DP/PWDs. The findings of our study and the studies we proposed could be used to discuss with students the burnout danger of being a change agent and being an active citizen in relation to DP/PWDs but also to discuss the issues DP/PWDs face in being allies of others. Such discussions could be useful in citizenship education, science education, intersectional pedagogy [50], and other education areas that see themselves as generating social consciousness in their students. Our results could be used in allyship courses that are given in many places.

Our findings also have implications for ally recruitment and retention. Our participants found that the lack of success is a factor in burnout and if one assumes there will not be success and that one experiences many negative reactions one might not endeavor to be an ally or stop being an ally. As such, we suggest that efforts to decrease ally burnout might not work if there is no change in the societal climate towards a climate that supports a decrease in the marginalizing of DP/PWDs, because many of the issues flagged by our participants, such as lack of support, are linked to a change in the societal climate towards DP/PD. Our findings also suggest that the decrease in the danger of ally burnout has to be an intrinsic part of, for example, science and technology governance, energy transition governance, and other social topics-related governance actions.