Sign in or 
Share this
What is “discrimination”?
“Discrimination” means being treated differently from other people, without a good reason. For example, if you were told you couldn’t go to school because you had an illness or got around in a wheelchair, this would be disability discrimination. If you were told not to come to school because you were from another country, this would be racial discrimination. These are not fair reasons to stop you getting an education.There are a number of “grounds” (reasons) for discrimination that aren’t allowed by law.
The Human Rights Act and the Bill of Rights don't allow discrimination on the grounds of sex, religious or ethical belief, colour, race, ethnic or national origins, disability, political opinion, employment status, family status, sexual orientation, marital status, or age if over 16 years.
For discrimination to be against the law, it has to be in a certain area, such as at work or in education. Sometimes a school will have a way of doing things that works well for everyone, except those who have disabilities. For example, if you have dyslexia (a reading/writing disability), you may not be able to read through your exam paper, write and review the answers in the same time as everyone else.
Your school could accommodate this disability by giving you extra time at the beginning of your exams. If you school won’t take your disability into account in its way of doing things, this may be “indirect discrimination”. You can usually spot indirect discrimination because people justify it by saying it’s fair because it’s the same rule for everyone.
The same rule for everyone can be unfair to those with disabilities. For more information about discrimination, contact the Human Rights Commission here.
The Human Rights Act and the Bill of Rights don't allow discrimination on the grounds of sex, religious or ethical belief, colour, race, ethnic or national origins, disability, political opinion, employment status, family status, sexual orientation, marital status, or age if over 16 years.
For discrimination to be against the law, it has to be in a certain area, such as at work or in education. Sometimes a school will have a way of doing things that works well for everyone, except those who have disabilities. For example, if you have dyslexia (a reading/writing disability), you may not be able to read through your exam paper, write and review the answers in the same time as everyone else.
Your school could accommodate this disability by giving you extra time at the beginning of your exams. If you school won’t take your disability into account in its way of doing things, this may be “indirect discrimination”. You can usually spot indirect discrimination because people justify it by saying it’s fair because it’s the same rule for everyone.
The same rule for everyone can be unfair to those with disabilities. For more information about discrimination, contact the Human Rights Commission here.
YouthLaw |
Latest page update: made by YouthLaw
, Aug 13 2009, 10:55 PM EDT
(about this update
About This Update
Edited by YouthLaw
283 words added view changes - complete history) |
|
Keyword tags:
discrimination
special needs
More Info: links to this page
|
| Started By | Thread Subject | Replies | Last Post | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| gyro812 | Justifiable discrimination? | 0 | Mar 25 2011, 6:35 PM EDT by gyro812 | ||
|
Thread started: Mar 25 2011, 6:35 PM EDT
Watch
In my attempt to try to enlighten people - discrimination & special needs children , I have shared my views to Politicians , Human rights com'' and so on .I formed a very strong opinion
that our laws , in many cases , Government agencies , Professionals, trusts which are set up to protect special needs children do discriminate sometimes in a very serious manner and p spread discrimination throughout the community. In my opinion is based a lot on ignorance , not having a clear understanding when dealing with these issues from a holistic standpoint. Ignorance is bliss. A classic example : ''Aspergers and violent behaviour''. There is a strong believe that violence and Aspergers go hand in hand. This is a view of many professionals who I am currently targeting to enlighten them on a few points. There have been a number of studies on this subject and none linked and supported this allegation. Violent behaviour is not in anyway part of the medical definition of Aspergers. My Wife and I owned a respite care centre for Aspergers children as many centre's refuse to take on Aspergers children under the criteria of violent behaviour. Our centre ran for seven and a half years and in this time period we have never had a single incident and on special occasions we had up to eleven Aspergers children stay at our centre at the same time. A s an Aspergers person myself it is the complete opposite of my nature. This is because it creates issues which makes my ability to deal with the syndrome so much harder. Lashing out is demonstrated by a minority of cases and is probably as a last resort or even maybe evidence of a co morbid disorder which may have not been identified. The allegation AND STIGMA tieing Aspergers people to violence is totally false is DISCRIMINATION It's not how harshly we judge that's the real issue. It's how often we're wrong. Quotation Rod Wintour 2011 |
||||
Showing 1 of 1 threads for this page
