Merit, Speech Disability and Discrimination

There is a substantial body of evidence – going back over decades – which indicates that the employment sphere is difficult for those who suffer a speech disability. To a large extent, I argue, this is due to the setting of merit in terms of orality and aesthetic. It also relates to the low perception of competence of the speech disabled. I argue that to be effective against discrimination the notion of merit and its assessment requires focus. ‘Merit’ as a concept in discrimination law has had its critics, yet it remains important to investigate it as social construct in order to help understand discrimination and how to counter this. For example, in this article I look at an instance where the resetting of what was viewed as ‘meritorious’ in judicial recruitment successfully improved the diversity in lower judicial posts.

Further, given the relative failure of the employment tribunal system to improve the general position of those who are disabled, I look to alternative methods of countering disability discrimination. The suggestion provided is that an enforced ombudsman type approach capable of dealing with what may be the core issue around employment discrimination (‘merit’) would provide a better mechanism for handling the general situation of disability discrimination than the tribunal system.

European Union non-discrimination law and intersectionality:Investigating the triangle of racial, gender and disability discrimination

This book contributes to a critical reflection of current legislative and jurisprudential developments in Non-Discrimination Law, focusing on the European Union. The book is focused on intersectionality between gender, race and disability and the question of whether, and to what extent, this intersection can be adequately addressed in (EU) law. The discussion rests on two basic assumptions. First, the multiplication of 'discrimination grounds' in EU law and other legal regimes should not result in a dilution of the demands of equality law. Accordingly, the book focuses on the three key grounds - race, gender and disability. These constitute nodes around which other discrimination grounds can be grouped. Second, any multi-ground non-discrimination law framework needs to engage with the question of discrimination on several grounds. This book provides a critical evaluation of some of the problems presented by such intersectionality and an opportunity to explore the issues in depth. This collection offers some new proposals relating to the regrouping of identity categories and to the general approach to socio-legal research in the field. It also contains a comparative section, which expands on practical experiences with intersectionality and law, and a section dedicated to juridical responses to intersectionality.

A study protocol for a pilot randomised trial of a structured education programme for the self-management of type 2 diabetes for adults with intellectual disabilities

BACKGROUND: The need for structured education programmes for type 2 diabetes is a high priority for many governments around the world. One such national education programme in the United Kingdom is the DESMOND Programme, which has been shown to be robust and effective for patients in general. However, these programmes are not generally targeted to people with intellectual disabilities (ID), and robust evidence on their effects for this population is lacking. We have adapted the DESMOND Programme for people with ID and type 2 diabetes to produce an amended programme known as DESMOND-ID. This protocol is for a pilot trial to determine whether a large-scale randomised trial is feasible, to test if DESMOND-ID is more effective than usual care in adults with ID for self-management of their type 2 diabetes, in particular as a means to reduce glycated haemoglobin (Hb1Ac), improve psychological wellbeing and quality of life and promote a healthier lifestyle. This protocol describes the rationale, methods, proposed analysis plan and organisational and administrative details.

METHODS/DESIGN: This trial is a two arm, individually randomised, pilot trial for adults with ID and type 2 diabetes, and their family and/or paid carers. It compares the DESMOND-ID programme with usual care. Approximately 36 adults with mild to moderate ID will be recruited from three countries in the United Kingdom. Family and/or paid carers may also participate in the study. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of two conditions using a secure computerised system with robust allocation concealment. A range of data will be collected from the adults with ID (biomedical, psychosocial and self-management strategies) and from their carers. Focus groups with all the participants will assess the acceptability of the intervention and the trial.

DISCUSSION: The lack of appropriate structured education programmes and educational materials for this population leads to secondary health conditions and may lead to premature deaths. There are significant benefits to be gained globally, if structured education programmes are adapted and shown to be successful for people with ID and other cognitive impairments.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered with International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial (identifier: ISRCTN93185560 ) on 10 November 2014.

Defining consensus norms for palliative care of people with intellectual disabilities in Europe using Delphi methods: A White Paper from the European Association of Palliative care

Background: People with intellectual disabilities often present with unique challenges that make it more difficult to meet their
palliative care needs.
Aim: To define consensus norms for palliative care of people with intellectual disabilities in Europe.
Design: Delphi study in four rounds: (1) a taskforce of 12 experts from seven European countries drafted the norms, based on available empirical knowledge and regional/national guidelines; (2) using an online survey, 34 experts from 18 European countries evaluated the draft norms, provided feedback and distributed the survey within their professional networks. Criteria for consensus
were clearly defined; (3) modifications and recommendations were made by the taskforce; and (4) the European Association for
Palliative Care reviewed and approved the final version.
Setting and participants: Taskforce members: identified through international networking strategies. Expert panel: a purposive sample identified through taskforce members’ networks.
Results: A total of 80 experts from 15 European countries evaluated 52 items within the following 13 norms: equity of access, communication, recognising the need for palliative care, assessment of total needs, symptom management, end-of-life decision making, involving those who matter, collaboration, support for family/carers, preparing for death, bereavement support, education/training
and developing/managing services. None of the items scored less than 86% agreement, making a further round unnecessary. In light of respondents’ comments, several items were modified and one item was deleted.
Conclusion: This White Paper presents the first guidance for clinical practice, policy and research related to palliative care for people with intellectual disabilities based on evidence and European consensus, setting a benchmark for changes in policy and practice.

Intersectionality and the Notion of Disability in EU discrimination law

Defining the characteristics targeted by banning discrimination constitutes a central challenge for EU discrimination law, and defining disability is particular-ly challenging due to the dispute around the very concept of disability. From 2006, the Court of Justice has wrestled with this definition in six judgments, five of which were delivered from 2013. Instead of classifying the case law definition as conforming to a medical or social model of disability, this article analyses the case law with a view to illustrate challenges of defining discrimination grounds generally, demanding that a sufficiently precise and non-exclusive definition of each discrimination ground can be achieved by re-focusing EU discrimination law around the nodes of sex, race and disability. The analysis exposes that the ECJ definition of disability neither complies with the UN CRPD nor adequately responds to intersectionality theory, for example because the definition is exclu-sionary in relation to female experience of disability.

Visual disability, visual function, and myopia among rural chinese secondary school children: the Xichang Pediatric Refractive Error Study (X-PRES)--report 1.

PURPOSE: To evaluate visual acuity, visual function, and prevalence of refractive error among Chinese secondary-school children in a cross-sectional school-based study. METHODS: Uncorrected, presenting, and best corrected visual acuity, cycloplegic autorefraction with refinement, and self-reported visual function were assessed in a random, cluster sample of rural secondary school students in Xichang, China. RESULTS: Among the 1892 subjects (97.3% of the consenting children, 84.7% of the total sample), mean age was 14.7 +/- 0.8 years, 51.2% were female, and 26.4% were wearing glasses. The proportion of children with uncorrected, presenting, and corrected visual disability (< or = 6/12 in the better eye) was 41.2%, 19.3%, and 0.5%, respectively. Myopia < -0.5, < -2.0, and < -6.0 D in both eyes was present in 62.3%, 31.1%, and 1.9% of the subjects, respectively. Among the children with visual disability when tested without correction, 98.7% was due to refractive error, while only 53.8% (414/770) of these children had appropriate correction. The girls had significantly (P < 0.001) more presenting visual disability and myopia < -2.0 D than did the boys. More myopic refractive error was associated with worse self-reported visual function (ANOVA trend test, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Visual disability in this population was common, highly correctable, and frequently uncorrected. The impact of refractive error on self-reported visual function was significant. Strategies and studies to understand and remove barriers to spectacle wear are needed.

Improving allied health professionals' research implementation behaviours for children with cerebral palsy: protocol for a before-after study

BACKGROUND: Cerebral palsy is a permanent disorder of posture and movement caused by disturbances in the developing brain. It affects approximately 1 in every 500 children in developed countries and is the most common form of childhood physical disability. People with cerebral palsy may also have problems with speech, vision and hearing, intellectual difficulties and epilepsy. Health and therapy services are frequently required throughout life, and this care should be effective and evidence informed; however, accessing and adopting new research findings into day-to-day clinical practice is often delayed.

METHODS/DESIGN: This 3-year study employs a before and after design to evaluate if a multi-strategy intervention can improve research implementation among allied health professionals (AHPs) who work with children and young people with cerebral palsy and to establish if children's health outcomes can be improved by routine clinical assessment. The intervention comprises (1) knowledge brokering with AHPs, (2) access to an online research evidence library, (3) provision of negotiated evidence-based training and education, and (4) routine use of evidence-based measures with children and young people aged 3-18 years with cerebral palsy. The study is being implemented in four organisations, with a fifth organisation acting as a comparison site, across four Australian states. Effectiveness will be assessed using questionnaires completed by AHPs at baseline, 6, 12 and 24 months, and by monitoring the extent of use of evidence-based measures. Children's health outcomes will be evaluated by longitudinal analyses.

DISCUSSION: Government, policy makers and service providers all seek evidence-based information to support decision-making about how to distribute scarce resources, and families are seeking information to support intervention choices. This study will provide knowledge about what constitutes an efficient, evidence-informed service and which allied health interventions are implemented for children with cerebral palsy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial is not a controlled healthcare intervention and is not registered.