Dear Andy,
George's message was indeed interesting as the interpretation of the 
legal point of view he refers to, is often articulated in organisations.

So to me it also is a reminder of conflicts between expressed values in 
such organisations and their actual practice.

You have the advantage that your academic background is in law, so it 
is good that we can all gain from your clarification of these legal 
points of view .

Regards, 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margarida Dolan, Ph.D.                             Phone: 0044(0)1225 
383241  Learning Support Tutor and Staff Developer         Fax:   
0044(0)1225 386709
Learning Support Service
University of Bath
Claverton Down, Bath BA2 7AY, UK
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The views and comments expressed in this email are confidential to the 
recipients and should not be passed on to others without permission.  
This email message does not necessarily express the views of the 
University of Bath and should be considered personal unless there is a 
specific statement to the contrary.

Quoting A Velarde <[log in to unmask]>:

> Interesting. I disagree. In my view, failure of disclosure does not preclude
> the right of the individual to have reasonable adjustments. Particularly
> because the institution has a legal proactive duty to make an accessible
> environment (I.e. curriculum). Part of the SENDA's principle of
> reasonablemeness in the context of disabilities is based on the possibility
> to predict that certain  disability categories  have social stigmas which
> make it difficult to disclose for the individual until transparency and
> provision are shown by the institution. Having enjoyed year of reading the
> British courts  approach to reasonableness I am in no doubt that such
> consideration would play a great deal  if a case ever arises in court, Andy
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "George Bell" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 3:19 PM
> Subject: Re: Mitigation and LPC students
>
>
> Pauline,
>
> One might suggest from a legal point of view, that failure
> to disclose such a condition on her University Entrance
> forms, would go against her were it brought up with the DDA.
>
> Perhaps this is a question the Law Department themselves
> should be asked?
>
> George.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion list for disabled students and their
> support staff. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
> Of Pauline McInnes
> Sent: 30 March 2006 14:06
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Mitigation and LPC students
>
> Dear All,
> We've got a tricky case here and we are all a bit stuck on
> how to proceed.
>
> I have a student who is doing her Legal Practice Course here
> which is validated by the Law Society.  She has a mental
> health condition and disclosed this quite late in her course
> to her Programme Leader.  The Programme Leader asked her for
> some medical evidence but didn't bother to refer her to the
> Disability Team.  At this time she was asking for some extra
> time to do her assignments I believe which she got.  She
> says that when she disclosed her disability she said that
> she also had difficulty in exams, but the Programme Leader
> says she has no recollection of this.
>
> So, the student has sat her exams twice without any
> reasonable adjustments in place and failed both times.
> Under our course regs for this course you get three attempts
> so she is on her final attempt now.
>
> We have been trying to get the faculty to agree (through our
> mitigation
> process) that should the student fail these exams as well
> that she should be given two further attempts.  This is
> because all students get three attempts but she has only had
> one attempt with her reasonable adjustments in place.
>
> We're also asking that because in previous attempts she
> didn't have any reasonable adjustments that her mark is not
> capped.
>
> Part of the reason for doing this in advance of the student
> sitting the exams was to provide a 'safety net' for her.
> She is already a very anxious student and going into an exam
> knowing that it is your very last chance is anxiety
> provoking for anyone.  We hoped that if she could go in
> knowing that she still had a further attempt this would
> allay her anxiety in the exams.
>
> Unfortunately, the faculty are refusing to even consider
> allowing her any more attempts at her exams if she fails
> this time around.  They just keep telling us that these are
> law society validated exams and it can't be done.
>
> Has anyone had any experience of this?
>
> If this student does fail her exams this time around and the
> University maintains that she cannot have any further
> attempts, then I think we are sitting targets under the DDA,
> for failing to make a reasonable adjustment.  The reasonable
> adjustment being to allow her further attempts.
>
> Does anyone have any thoughts on this or have I just
> confused you all totally?
>
> Regards
> Pauline
>
>
> Pauline McInnes
> Disability Co-ordinator
> Disability Team
> Student Services
> St Mary's Road
> Ealing
> London
> W5 5RF
> Tel:  0208 231 2058
>