Breaking: Inaccessible Designs Causing Life-Threatening Consequences
A newly released proposal warns that well-intentioned designers are inadvertently creating websites and apps that exclude millions of users, with potentially life-or-death consequences. The proposal, published by an accessibility expert, argues that the core problem is an overload of design guidelines that designers cannot recall during the creative process.
“Designers are good people,” the expert states. “I have never heard a designer say, ‘I don’t care if somebody can’t read this text.’ Yet, some designs still exclude people.”
Expert Quotes on the Human Toll
The proposal draws on research by Aral Balkan, who demonstrated that even a simple bus timetable app can affect life events. “Somebody might miss a life event, such as their daughter’s fifth birthday party,” Balkan wrote in his essay This Is All There Is. “Or somebody might miss a death event, such as the chance to say goodbye to a dying grandmother.”
The author of the proposal adds: “The frustrating question is, why do some designs still exclude people? We know that not everybody sees, hears, thinks, or moves the same way.”
Background: The Information Overload Problem
Designers are expected to absorb a vast array of guidance—from usability best practices to accessibility standards. The sheer volume makes it impossible to recall everything during design sessions. The proposal identifies this as a root cause: “There is too much to recall.”
Recognizing the issue, the author points to Jakob Nielsen’s 10 Usability Heuristics for User Interface Design, specifically heuristic № 6, “Recognition rather than Recall.” Nielsen originally applied this to users, but the proposal suggests tweaking it for designers: make accessibility issues visible and easily retrievable during the design process.
What This Means: A Practical Path Forward
If adopted, this shift could dramatically reduce exclusion. Instead of forcing designers to memorize every guideline, tools and checklists would embed accessibility cues directly into design software. The proposal cites A Web for Everyone by Sarah Horton and Whitney Quesenbery as a resource for such an approach.
The stakes are high. With remote work, digital health services, and online education becoming essential, inaccessible design is not just an inconvenience—it is a barrier to fundamental rights. “This is life-or-death stuff,” the expert warns.
Industry groups are already discussing how to implement these heuristics. The proposal serves as a call to action: redesign the design process itself to prioritize inclusion from the outset.
For ongoing coverage, see our resources section.