Skip to main content

Post content has been hidden

To unblock this content, please click here

E

A question about disability - how do you define it?

Eleda, 20 November, 2008 at 19:33 Posted on Off Topic Posts 0 13

I mean legally? Is there anywhere that says "this is a disability" or "these are diseases which, if you have them, mean you're disabled"?

I can't go into the details on here, sorry for being a bit vague.

13 replies

Latest activity by Orly Bird, 23 November, 2008 at 22:53
  • marmalade atkins
    Beginner January 2008
    marmalade atkins ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    If you Google DDA (disability discrimination act), there should be a direct.gov site that will define the term for you. The DDA itself may define it for purposes of law.

    • Reply
  • stormfairy
    stormfairy ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    From my understanding it is done on individual basis. i.e. what one person may be able to do whilst suffering a disease another may not.

    for example, most cancer sufferers are not classed disabled, but my father due to a variety of factors directly contributed to his cancer means that he is disabled. Although he is able to walk, he is not able to walk very far at all and gets exhausted very quickly and hence his disability status

    • Reply
  • MD
    Beginner
    MD ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    Can't remember the exact definition, but its something that affects day-to-day life for a period of 12 months or more.

    • Reply
  • MD
    Beginner
    MD ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    Definition of 'disability' under the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA)

    The Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) defines a disabled person as someone who has a physical or mental impairment that has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on his or her ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities.

    The definition

    For the purposes of the Act:

    • substantial means neither minor nor trivial
    • long term means that the effect of the impairment has lasted or is likely to last for at least 12 months (there are special rules covering recurring or fluctuating conditions)
    • normal day-to-day activities include everyday things like eating, washing, walking and going shopping
    • a normal day-to-day activity must affect one of the 'capacities' listed in the Act which include mobility, manual dexterity, speech, hearing, seeing and memory

    Some conditions, such as a tendency to set fires and hay fever, are specifically excluded.

    People who have had a disability in the past that meets this definition are also covered by the scope of the Act. There are additional provisions relating to people with progressive conditions.

    The DDA 2005 amended the definition of disability. It ensured that people with HIV, cancer and multiple sclerosis are deemed to be covered by the DDA effectively from the point of diagnosis, rather than from the point when the condition has some adverse effect on their ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities.

    • Reply
  • E
    Eleda ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    Thankyou all so much for this, it was very useful, sorry I've only just come back to thank you all! x x ?

    • Reply
  • Roobarb
    Beginner January 2007
    Roobarb ·
    • Report
    • Hide content
    View quoted message

    Under the Disability Discrimination Act cancer is one of the diseases that is automatically covered.

    • Reply
  • Clairy
    Beginner October 2003
    Clairy ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    "Some conditions, such as a tendency to set fires and hay fever, are specifically excluded."

    What?! ??

    • Reply
  • E
    Eleda ·
    • Report
    • Hide content
    View quoted message

    Yep, and HIV and MS. In answer to my own question, according to my legal peeps, only a district judge can decide definitively if the impairment falls outside these specific diseases, but so long as the effects of the impairment fall inside the criteria of long term, substantial and affecting day to day activities, then it's highly likely that the person would be found to be disabled and most people who fall under the Act don't have any trouble proving this.

    • Reply
  • stormfairy
    stormfairy ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    I didnt't know that. Rereading the bit above I see it was brought in in 2005, I'm guessing that it was brought in shortly after father got his inital diagnosis as he had to go through lots of paperwork etc to get classed

    • Reply
  • M
    Beginner November 2007
    MarineGirl ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    HB, I did a Graduate Diploma in Law, finishing this summer just passed. Didn't cover DDA 1995, but as part of the course I had student access to a variety of legal databases - basically the judgments in many cases. Just checked, and surprised to find my access appears to still be live... it can be a bit needle in a haystack, but it means I can search specific terms across 1000s of cases. So for example, I could search 'disability tendency to set fires' - and any case that had all keywords would come up. PM me if there's anything specific you'd like me to search - confidential of course. You never know - might find the result of a previous case. Would only be ones that are recorded in detail though - so higher than a district judge usually. Although - generally higher courts are binding on lower, so that could be a good thing!

    • Reply
  • E
    Eleda ·
    • Report
    • Hide content
    View quoted message

    I didn't think I could love you more than I do already but I do! ?Cake at mine soon?

    • Reply
  • Orly Bird
    Beginner April 2007
    Orly Bird ·
    • Report
    • Hide content
    View quoted message

    MG - do you mind if I PM you as well, please ?

    • Reply

You voted for . Add a comment 👇

×

Related articles

General groups

Hitched article topics