Transcript No Slide Title

Disability Rights Commission
The Disability Rights Commission (DRC) is an
independent body, established by an Act of
Parliament to eliminate discrimination against
disabled people and promote equality of
opportunity.
To achieve this, we have set ourselves the goal
of "a society where all disabled people can
participate fully as equal citizens“.
What the DRC does –
advice/support for individuals
• Provides an advice and information service for disabled
people, employers and service providers and education
institutions - HELPLINE
• supports disabled people in securing their rights under the
DDA - CASEWORK
• supports legal cases to set new precedents and test the
limits of the law – (105 cases in our first two years) –
LEGAL
• provides an independent Disability Conciliation Service for
disabled people and service providers through Mediation
UK - DCS
What else the DRC does
• campaigns to strengthen the law so that it works
better and protects more disabled people
• puts on events and conferences to raise public
awareness of disability issues
• produces publications about rights for disabled
people and good practice for employers, service
providers and education providers
• publishes policy statements and research on issues
which affect disabled people.
Education – the first nine
months
• SENDA 2001 amended Part 4 of DDA 1995 most amendments came into force on 1st
September 2002
• Impact and cases so far
• Further amendments coming into force on 1st
September 2003 and 1st September 2005
Helpline
•
•
•
•
•
44000 requests for literature
450 potential cases
68% schools / 32% Post 16
305 referred to casework
40 cases out of scope because of auxiliary
aids and physical features
Casework
• 305 cases opened
• 40% (121) Post 16
• 97 England, 17 Scotland, 7 Wales
• 13 referred to DCS
Legal
• 6 cases
• 3 Post 16
– Reasonable adjustment of on-campus
accommodation for student with mental
health issues
– Exclusion of adult learners with learning
difficulties
Hot Topics
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Access to complaints procedures
Recording lectures
Adjustments to examinations
Medication
Professional courses
Physical features
DSA
Auxiliary aids & services
Access to complaints
procedures
• Complaints procedures not available in
alternative formats
• Reliance on spouses/partners/family
members to communicate between institution
& student
• Many cases could be resolved with
accessible complaints procedure
Recording Lectures
• Reluctance by academic staff to allow
reasonable adjustment of tape recording
lectures
• Perceived conflict with copyright law
• Work with NATFHE
Reasonable adjustments to
exams/assessments
• Perceived conflict with academic standards
• Reluctance to consider alternative methods of
assessment
• Use of readers/interpreters
• Examinations & Assessment Good Practice
Guide
Medication/Health issues
• Conflict with Health & Safety concerns
• Refusal to store medication for students
• Lack of understanding about “dangers” of
medication
• Reluctance to allow students to manage own
disability/pain/medication
• Risk assessments
Professional Courses
• Conflict between requirements of professional
body and duty to make reasonable
adjustments
• Institutions “hiding behind” professional
bodies
• “Fitness to practice” concerns
• New Part 2 duties for qualifying bodies
Physical features
• Reluctance to find alternative means of
making buildings accessible e.g. moving
lectures/services to accessible building
• New duties from September 2005
• Part 2 duties already in force
• Part 3 duties from October 2004
DSA
• Disagreements over assessments and level
of support
• Delays
• Overlap with auxiliary aids and services
• Postgraduate students
• Overseas students
Auxiliary aids & services
• Lack of clarity of what constitutes “auxiliary
aids or services”
• Large Font
• Overlap with DSA – who is responsible for
cost
• New duties from 1st September 2003
Duty to provide NMHs
• Institutions duty to make reasonable
adjustments
• From September 2003 this duty will include
auxiliary aids and services
• When considering what is reasonable
relevant factor is “grants or loans likely to be
available to disabled students” (CoP 6.8 –6.9)
• Existence of DSA does not remove
institutions’ duties
Example 6.8A
• A deaf student on a degree course has been
assessed as needing a sign language
interpreter for all her lectures and seminars. It
is unlikely to be reasonable to expect the
university to fund an interpreter if the student
has the resources for this through her
Disabled Students’ Allowances.
Example 6.9A
• A student who has cerebral palsy has
received funding through the Disabled
Students’ Allowances to buy an adapted
keyboard to use with his computer. However,
it is too cumbersome for him to transport
every day from his residence to the university.
It is likely to be reasonable to expect the
university to provide him with a similar
adaptation for a computer within the
computer cluster at the university.
Court/Tribunal cases
• Only a handful of Post 16 cases commenced
in the County Court – not aware of any that
have gone to trial yet
• 5 schools cases heard at SENDIST
• Most cases settled before proceedings
commenced
• No caselaw yet
Some examples
of potential cases
• Student refused place in Nursing diploma due to a
history of mental health issues despite medical
evidence confirming her fitness to undertake course.
• University refusing to make reasonable adjustments
to enable medical student to complete degree despite
GMC confirming fitness to practice and
recommending reasonable adjustment.
Further examples
• FE college not allowing student to attend
classes in electric wheelchair as it might
damage new carpet
• College deciding student not fit to practice as
a counsellor due to physical impairment
causing pain
Further examples
• Colleges/Universities asking students with
mobility difficulties not to attend during
firefighter strikes
• University refusing to move notice board to
accessible building
Lessons from Australia
• Mike Adams/HEFCE - full report
• Very few cases have gone all the way to court
• Court cases result in immediate compliance
but not necessarily systemic change
Kinsela v Queensland University
of Technology (1997)
• Inaccessible venue for graduation ceremony
• University ordered to change venue
• Changed for that year and then changed
back for future years
• No claim for damages
Bishop v Sports Massage
Training School (2000)
• Dyslexia
• Adjustments to written exam
• Disclosure – told lecturer in 3 month period
before exam then handed in report 1 week
before exam
• Level of damages – delay in career and loss
of self-esteem
Sluggett v HREOC (2002)
• No unlawful discrimination
• Accessible facilities and information on these
were available
• University no responsible for student’s failure
to take advantage of them
Lessons from Part 3
• Increased awareness in county court
• Increasing damages
• Higher injury to feeling with continuing
relationship
• Part 4 case may include loss of earnings