Published on 12, July, 2020
I promised to do this a while ago, and now I'm finally getting around to it. The petition will be on petition.parliament.uk. The character counts are extremely limited, so it was difficult to provide the needed information in the available space. Please let me know what you think of the text below, because this is for all of us and not just me. Note that the information I have provided (see the links) is also from a government website, so they can't really refute that.
The title of the petition is:
Make neurodiversity a separate protected characteristic.
The background I have written is:
Neurodivergent individuals, e.g. those with autism or Tourette's, often suffer discrimination due to their condition, whether or not their condition amounts to a disabilty. Making neurodiversity a protected characteristic in itself, separate from disability, would be a step in the right direction.
Here are the additional details I have written:
Neurodivergent individuals are denied both fair treatment and mental health services at a higher rate than in the general population. As a result, the unemployment and suicide rates in the neurodivergent group are disproportionately higher as well. Presently, they are obliged to prove that their condition amounts to a disability in order to be legally protected from the discrimination and mistreatment to which they so often fall victim. Further info: tinyurl.com/y829k3oh & tinyurl.com/yavfxmod.
PS I need 5 emails addresses for supporters of the petition, so if anyone is a UK citizen and willing to "officially" support the petition, please PM me. I can likely get some from people I know, but maybe not all five that I need (I don't know many people).
Thanks.
(Edited based on comments received)
I do agree with this, although I can see problems with getting it accepted. This is simply because autism is just put in the 'disability' section of the Equality Act, despite many of us not feeling disabled in the conventional sense.
There are debates about 'disability' being too much engrained in peoples minds as the medical model of disability, whereas many autistic people come within the 'social' model, which would cover many more autistic people.
There are certain disabilities which are automatically classed as such without further proof - cancer, multiple sclerosis and HIV, which are recognised from day one of diagnosis. Perhaps what we need really is for autism to be so recognised (under the social model of disability) which should prevent the problems. Because I cannot see there being a separate heading for neurodiversity discrimination, however much we think it a good idea, and one which I would support.
However, giving Autism 'automatic disabillty status' would prevent all the problems and arguments we have about getting adjustments made for us at work and in the wider world. And giving greater understanding as to what the social model of disabiliity is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_model_of_disability
The purpose of this is to recognise that all neurodiverse people, not just the ones who are disabled (or are easily recognised as such by others), have a greater chance of being subject to discrimination and other types of negative treatment, just because they are different. I agree with the social model of disability, and, in my mind, it needs to replace the current definition of disability in the Equality Act. However, is a person disabled because they are treated badly by others? If that were the case, then other minority groups who are often mistreated could possibly be considered "disabled" as well.
All the disability-related forms of mistreatment aside (which would still be illegal - I'm not trying to change that), it is often the case that neurodiverse or neurodivergent people are treated differently, not because they are disabled, but simply because they don't fit the neurotypicals' category of "one of us", at work, at school, and in other situations. This type of discrimination, much like discrimination based on race or gender, for example, has nothing to do with how much time a person takes off from work because of disability-related illness or the need for reasonable adjustments. It is because, even though they are often just as capable of doing their job, they are seen as different, and, unlike with the perception of disability, this difference is nearly as apparent to others as skin colour or gender, and, in my experience, it seems to invoke extremely negative reactions in others, beyond any kind of reason or logic.
It is the case that neurodiverse people - whether they consider themselves disabled or not - are mistreated more often than any other group (probably because they are perceived as not being able to defend themselves, which is often true). Here, I am referring to types of discriminatory behaviours that fall outside of those that are specific to disabilty. I think there needs to be another category, separate from disability, to protect people who are discriminated against, not because they are disabled, but because they are different. I want to make sure people can't shrug this off by saying that neurodiverse people are protected under the umbrella of disability anyway because it is not always the case that everyone is protected, and some neurodiverse people simply don't self-identify as disabled, so they shouldn't be forced to do so in order to be protected by the law.
We belong to a minority group whose members are often treated badly by others just for being a member of that group. Why should we have fewer rights than members of any other minority group? By fewer rights, I mean that we are not automatically protected as someone belonging to any other minority group would be. We first have to prove that we are disabled, and if someone doesn't manage to do so, that is, that person falls into the category of being obviously not like everyone else (and thus open to mistreatment), but not impaired enough to be considered "disabled", there is no legal protection available. No other minority group has that additional burden placed on them.
I want to change that.