A grieving teenager is exposing the grinding reality of everyday discrimination, and the results could be transformative, says Guardian columnist Adita Chakrabortty
NHS Staff will able to refuse non-emergency treatment to patients being racist, sexist, or homophobic under new rules from April.
Source: NHS Staff Will Able to Refuse Non-Emergency Treatment to Patients Being Racist or Sexist : Global Citizen
The notice posted in a residential building in Norwich, eastern England, has been reported to police.
What sort of person repeatedly picks on a disabled child in the most vicious and cruel of terms?
The answer, of course, is the sort of people the model Katie Price had in mindwhen she started campaigning for online abuse to become a specific criminal offence. Price’s 15-year-old son Harvey – who is blind, autistic and has Prader-Willi syndrome – has been hideously mocked and taunted. His mother quickly gathered more than 220,000 supportive signatures for a petition demanding online abuse be treated as a hate crime, and now the parliamentary petitions committee has accepted her argument that the law isn’t fit for purpose – or to be precise a part of that argument. (Price’s petition referred not just to disability but to homophobia, racism and even body-shaming of women; the MPs were careful to single out disability alone, arguing in their report that they didn’t want to cut across the work of others on the rest.)
This is all down the the Governments rhetoric and the media content, both should stop this encouragement to abuse others.
All who abuse and encourage abuse should be prosecuted for Hate Crime no matter who or what they.
Being the Government is no excuse.
This is a travesty and completely against what should be in the Equality Act 2010. How can one human being be treated like this and by a, so called, nationised industry.
Those who want whole scale re-nationalisation hold LNER as an example, but an example of what, it appears total inequality.
It would appear that reasonable adjustments need to be made, like providing all disabiled people who travel on public transport some form of immediate communication to stop this occurring again.
Why can not these incidents be treated as a’Hate Crime’.
‘spokesman for LNER told the BBC: “We are very sorry for the unacceptable experience Ms Davis had whilst travelling with us.
“We are fully investigating the incident to understand what went wrong and to ensure that lessons are learnt for the future.” But will they, how many times over many years have these words ‘lessons are learnt ‘ been mentioned, but are they, well, if they are you can count them on ‘one’ finger.
A friend recently told me about how he had been angry and offensive to a colleague who suffers from ADHD and depression and struggles to maintain concentration: “If nobody puts him back in his place, he will never improve,” he said. I was shocked, and reminded of how difficult managing a disability can be.
The thing is, I’m disabled too. But in a perverse sense I’m lucky, as I can hide my disability. I often wonder if I would struggle to manage my behaviour, too, if I received the same treatment as my colleague with a more visible disability.
A coach company is ignoring access laws by refusing to allow wheelchair-users to travel on its services on the same day they buy tickets, while exposing its drivers to possible criminal charges.
Transport laws state that any company that has already introduced accessible coaches – even though this is not obligatory until 2020 – must ensure that those vehicles provide a space for wheelchair-users to travel in their wheelchairs.
Although the coach company National Express does have such spaces on nearly all its vehicles, they are usually covered by temporary seats, and it demands at least 24 hours’ notice to remove them and so clear the space if a wheelchair-user wishes to travel in their wheelchair.
But accessible transport campaigner Doug Paulley has demonstrated that National Express is breaching the law by failing to ensure those spaces can be accessed easily and refusing to allow wheelchair-users to “turn up and go” on its services.
He is due to discuss the issue with the managing director of National Express, Chris Hardy.
Paulley’s concerns about the way the company dealt with wheelchair-users who wish to travel spontaneously were first confirmed last August.
He bought a ticket from Bradford to Leeds on a coach that was leaving within half an hour, but when he reached the coach he was told he should have given 24 hours’ notice and would not be allowed to board as it would take too long to remove the temporary seating.
Any coaches that have been adapted to be compliant with Public Service Vehicle Accessibility Regulations – as National Express’s have – must provide a wheelchair space and make that space available to wheelchair-users.
Separate laws state that a coach driver is committing a criminal offence* if he or she does not allow a wheelchair-user to access that space, if it is not occupied by another disabled passenger and the coach is not full.
Such spaces are legally defined as unoccupied even if they are covered by temporary seating.
After realising in February that the coach driver could have been committing a criminal offence, Paulley contacted West Yorkshire Police, which initially refused to treat the incident as a crime.
Thank you for this posting and am I surprised at the Judges deliberation on the ruling related to the sentence.
My response is yes and no.
Yes, because it would appear that there has been no justice for Lorien Norman’s eight-month-old daughter Evie. I also believe the Judge is wrong in that Evie’s injuries were ‘likely to resolve’. This may be so for any visible signs or markings, but what about the invisible injuries of which many may not have been currently manifested, as is the case with any psychology injuries which may or may not manifest for some years to come.
While No, as this may be a one off occurrence and Lorien Norman may, in fact, really learn from this, that this behaviour is not and never will be acceptable and she will never have any re-occurrence to Evie or anyone else. If she was given a custodial sentence then Evie could have lost the continued bonding with her mother Loren Norman forever and this in itself could have lasting psychological effects.
A case that can be right or wrong or may be both no matter which actions the Judge had taken.
The religious effect may have a bearing as this itself could have some bearing on how Loren Norman progresses in her life. But many people especially today are not religious or have different religions all with their own interpretations of how religion conducts itself within their lives for there are also many religions and people should have the freedom to chose their own religion or conversely to have no effective religion.
For those who do take on board a specific religion there is then the degree in which they take on their chosen religion, as on reflecting on all religions there will be different aspects taken on board in each religion by each individual person.
In effect we should all be understanding of each others beliefs and respect each persons individual choice, as a religion should be there for the person and not the person for the religion.
We should have the freedom of choice and the freedom to apply this choice in anyway we wish and to what degree we do so.
There is a proviso in that this choice of religion and the degree should not have any adverse effect on any other individual within the same religion or in any other religions.
I am not saying do not preach unto others, but do respect all other religions and all individuals.
We have all seen where fanaticism can lead in the formation of ISIS (Daesh), but this is not restrictive to Islam as it can occur in any religion as there are extreme fanatics in Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism to name just three more.
There is a great need for more tolerance within the World as the World should be large enough to accommodate all beliefs.