OliverMcgowan issues: Difference between revisions
PeteTyerman (talk | contribs) (first version) |
PeteTyerman (talk | contribs) (corrections) |
||
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
===== It substantially weakens the position of those with Autism and or Learning disabilities who wish to challenge discriminatory behaviour (including expecting adjustments to be made.) ===== | ===== It substantially weakens the position of those with Autism and or Learning disabilities who wish to challenge discriminatory behaviour (including expecting adjustments to be made.) ===== | ||
==== . ==== | |||
'''diagnosis →Disability → legal ( not just moral)duty to make adjustments had been clearly understood.''' | ==== '''It is my impression that Olivers outcome might have been very different if the diagnosis →Disability → legal ( not just moral)duty to make adjustments had been clearly understood.''' ==== | ||
The Oliver McGowan training as it currently stands is | |||
==== The Oliver McGowan training as it currently stands is unlikely to improve the recognition of learning disabilities and Autism unless the NHS is willing to accept the diagnosis results in legal duties as it is going to have difficulty convincing particularly NHS professionals to change their ways without this. ==== | |||
Latest revision as of 08:16, 8 April 2024
I am writing to you as I think you should be aware NHS England who you have worked with on the Oliver McGown training is not as supportive as it might appear.
Your campaigning following the tragic episode involving Oliver has the potential to significantly improve the situation.
However, whilst supporting your work on this NHS England is also allowing/undertaking a very negative attitude to Autism within the employment field and by implication to all with autism, learning disability and similar conditions.
I raised a complaint with NHS Digital which was transferred to NHS England after the merger.
The complaint was raised as my adult son’s diagnosis of Autism and the consequential disability as defined by the Equality Act were denied in a tribunal despite a diagnostic report from an HCPC registered Clinical Psychologist who works in an NHS Autism diagnostic service and who stated in the report that he was disabled.
I requested the reasons why and complained that NHS England would not accept the conditions in the International Classification of Diseases( ICD 11) neurodevelopmental disorders (which includes both Autism and Disorders of Intellectual Development).
The CEO of NHS Digital informed us that only a court could decide if an individual was disabled.
The NHS Digital and later NHS England refused to accept the diagnosis or disability clearly evidenced in 2 reports without any clinical evidence to support their position.
While it is clear in the Equality Act 2010(The) that if disability is disputed the tribunal/court would be the arbitrator that is very different from the position NHS England took and continues to take above as it has stated it has nothing to add to the original position .