Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 3:26 am
Time: 3:26 am
Results for disabled persons
13 results foundAuthor: Great Britain. Inspectorate for the Crown Prosecution Service, Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary Title: Living in a Different World: Joint Review of Disability Hate Crime Summary: This joint review considered how the police, Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and probation trusts deal with the complex area known as disability hate crime. This has involved a consideration of not only the policies/procedures and actions of the three agencies, but also social attitudes and barriers that exist in relation to disabled people more generally. They are linked together. Whist disability hate crime is one of the five hate crime strands, (the others being race, religion, sexual orientation or transgender identity) there needs to be an acknowledgment that it has a unique position and requires additional status, simply to ensure that it is treated on an equal footing to the other strands. Disability is an area where social attitudes are still ill informed. Key findings Identification and reporting of disability hate crime Whilst definitions and guidance have been issued, this review reveals that there is a lack of clarity and understanding as to what constitutes a disability hate crime and confusion between policy definitions and the statutory sentencing provision contained within section 146 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (s.146 CJA 2003). (This is the statutory provision that allows the court to regard the defendant’s behaviour as an aggravating feature if (a) the offender has demonstrated hostility based on a disability or (b) the offence was motivated by hostility towards persons who have a disability - see paragraph 2.3.) This causes difficulties not only for practitioners in the identification and recording of disability hate crime but also for members of the public, including victims who are disabled. Improvements need to be made by the police and CPS in how they identify and record disability hate crime. All police, CPS and probation staff need to be fully aware of the statutory provision in s.146 CJA 2003 and there needs to be a common policy definition that is universally recognised and applied at ‘ground level’, that is simple to interpret. The under reporting of disability hate crime remains a significant concern and needs to be addressed. Whilst a number of initiatives have been put in place, further steps need to be taken to improve the confidence of disabled people to report matters to the police. A variety of effective reporting mechanisms are required. Once reports are made to the police, practitioners need to ensure that any disabilities are identified (including hidden impairments). Victims must then be supported sufficiently, their evidence given in the most effective manner and kept fully informed of what is happening in their case. Whilst community engagement projects are currently undertaken by the police and CPS, these need to be jointly co-ordinated, and have specific aims. The immediate priority should be increasing reporting of disability hate crime. Probation trusts also need to increase their awareness of disability issues through engagement with disabled members of our community. The police investigation and prosecution process The police are failing to fully consider disability hate crime issues in day to day investigative work. This review reveals examples of poor understanding of different types of disabilities by officers and in addition there is frequently a failure to examine the offender’s motivation for committing offences. As a consequence, insufficient evidence is obtained to support the requirement set out for the court to regard the defendant’s actions as an aggravating feature under s.146 CJA 2003. There is also a failure by the police to identify disability hate crimes to the CPS when seeking charging advice and a lack of provision of appropriate information to the CPS by the police. Whilst CPS lawyers demonstrated the ability to identify disability hate crimes on occasion, they did not necessarily ensure that the police provided all of the required evidence and did not always analyse the disability hate crime issue sufficiently. There was also a lack of clarity displayed by CPS lawyers as to what essential information should be included within the initial charging advice. The CPS needs to ensure that disability hate crime cases are correctly identified on its case management system. The number of administrative errors needs to be reduced substantially and lawyers need to identify cases against clear and understandable criteria. A process also needs to be in place to ensure that on every relevant file a decision is made whether the prosecutor will put forward s.146 CJA 2003 to the court. Clear records need to be maintained of the results of those cases where s.146 CJA 2003 is raised. The CPS needs to improve its performance in relation to the quality of case preparation to ensure that disability hate crimes are effectively prosecuted. At court and post-conviction Whilst inspectors witnessed examples of CPS lawyers raising s.146 CJA 2003 at court, it was of concern that all of the members of the judiciary who were interviewed as part of the review were of the view that they were not being invited to consider s.146 CJA 2003 on anything but a very exceptional basis. It does not appear that s.146 CJA 2003 has been embedded within the sentencing process. The quality of CPS and police information supplied to probation trusts was limited and insufficient for the preparation of a pre-sentence report and there was an over reliance on information provided by the offender, who minimised the seriousness of the offence. This lack of provision of key information also impacted on probation trust offender managers carrying out the role effectively and resulted in a culture of accepting the offender’s account, rather than placing the focus on the victim. Training and leadership As the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) report Hidden in plain sight - Inquiry into disability-related harassment (the EHRC report) states, ‘many people can simply feel uncomfortable about disability’ and the practitioners who are dealing with these cases will have widely varying levels of experience of interaction with disabled people. This is a difficulty that is not generally present when dealing with other crimes. There needs to be put in place an effective and comprehensive training programme for practitioners. Whilst progress has been made in relation to disability hate crime, the leaders of the police, CPS and probation trusts need to regard it as a key strategic priority. The relatively low numbers of disability hate crimes currently recorded should not be allowed to be used to devalue the importance of these types of crimes. There are reasons why the current figures are so low and many relate to the inability of the criminal justice system to combat prevalent social attitudes and to deal effectively with cases that can have inherent complexities. Given the demands on staff, without determination on the part of the leadership to achieve real change, there is unlikely to be any significant progress. Conclusion, recommendations and good practice Conclusion Disability hate crime is a complex area and has a number of unique features. In many ways it is the hate crime that has been left behind. The Government report Challenge it, Report it, Stop it - The Government’s Plan to Tackle Hate Crime (March 2012) highlights the importance of dealing with hate crime appropriately, not only for the individuals and their families, but also because of the negative impact these types of crimes have on communities in relation to cohesion and integration. It also sets an agenda for the criminal justice agencies to improve their performance in relation to all hate crimes and this presents a unique opportunity for the police, CPS and probation trusts to contribute to tackling the underlying prejudice and ignorance that drives hate crime. A new impetus that focuses on (a) improving awareness of what disability hate crime is, (b) increasing the reporting of disability hate crime and (c) embedding disability hate crime processes within the routine working practices of police, CPS and probation trust staff is required. The report concludes with a number of recommendations. Details: London: HMCPSI, HMIC; HMI Probation, 2013. 66p. Source: Internet Resource: Criminal Justice Joint Inspection: Accessed March 22, 2013 at: http://www.hmic.gov.uk/media/a-joint-review-of-disability-hate-crime-living-in-a-different-world-20130321.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.hmic.gov.uk/media/a-joint-review-of-disability-hate-crime-living-in-a-different-world-20130321.pdf Shelf Number: 128084 Keywords: Bias CrimesDisabilityDisabled PersonsHate Crimes (U.K.) |
Author: Cunniffe, Charles Title: Estimating the prevalence of disability amongst prisoners: results from the Surveying Prisoner Crime Reduction (SPCR) survey Summary: This Research Summary estimates the proportion of newly sentenced prisoners in prisons in England and Wales who are disabled using screened answers to survey questions about perceived disability, physical health, and anxiety and depression. It also provides an overview of the problems and needs of disabled prisoners as a group, compared to non-disabled prisoners. Data for this report come from Surveying Prisoner Crime Reduction (SPCR), a longitudinal cohort study of 1,435 adult prisoners sentenced to between one month and four years in prison in 2005 and 2006. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2012. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Summary 4/12: Accessed November 13, 2014 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/278827/estimating-prevalence-disability-amongst-prisoners.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/278827/estimating-prevalence-disability-amongst-prisoners.pdf Shelf Number: 134080 Keywords: Disability Disabled PersonsPrisoners (U.K.) |
Author: Bronson, Jennifer Title: Disabilities Among Prison and Jail Inmates, 2011-12 Summary: Presents the prevalence of disabilities among prison and jail inmates, detailing the prevalence of six specific disability types: hearing, vision, cognitive, ambulatory, self-care, and independent living. Important differences in each type of disability are highlighted by demographic characteristics. The report also assesses the prevalence of disabilities with other health problems, such as a current chronic condition, obesity, ever having an infectious disease, and past 30-day serious psychological distress. Findings are based on prison and jail inmate self-reported data from BJSs 201112 National Inmate Survey (NIS-3). Data from the 2012 American Community Survey (ACS) and 20092012 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) were used to compare the incarcerated populations to the noninstitutionalized general population. Highlights: An estimated 32% of prisoners and 40% of jail inmates reported having at least one disability. Prisoners were nearly 3 times more likely and jail inmates were more than 4 times more likely than the general population to report having at least one disability. About 2 in 10 prisoners and 3 in 10 jail inmates reported having a cognitive disability, the most common reported disability in each population . Female prisoners were more likely than male prisoners to report having a cognitive disability, but were equally likely to report having each of the other five disabilities. Non-Hispanic white prisoners (37%) and prisoners of two or more races (42%) were more likely than non-Hispanic black prisoners (26%) to report having at least one disability. More than half of prisoners (54%) and jail inmates (53%) with a disability reported a co-occurring chronic condition. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2015. 13p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 8, 2016 at: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/dpji1112.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/dpji1112.pdf Shelf Number: 137801 Keywords: DisabilityDisabled PersonsInmatesPrisoners |
Author: Frawley, Patsie Title: What does it take? Developing informed and effective tertiary responses to violence and abuse of women and girls with disabilities in Australia: State of knowledge paper Summary: This paper establishes the current state of knowledge on tertiary responses to violence and abuse for women and girls with disabilities. The paper outlines: -tertiary responses to violence and abuse for women and young women with disabilities; and -what the evidence says about the effectiveness of tertiary responses for women and young women with disabilities Details: Alexandria, NSW: Australia's National Research Organisation for Women's Safety Limited (ANROWS), 2015. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: State of Knowledge Paper, Issue 03: Accessed February 25, 2016 at: http://media.aomx.com/anrows.org.au/s3fs-public/3_3.4%20Landscapes%20Disability.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Australia URL: http://media.aomx.com/anrows.org.au/s3fs-public/3_3.4%20Landscapes%20Disability.pdf Shelf Number: 137961 Keywords: DisabilitiesDisabled PersonsViolence Against Women, Girls |
Author: Young, Jesse T. Title: Transition from prison for people with intellectual disability: A qualitative study of service professionals Summary: People with intellectual disability face a range of challenges on their release from prison due both to their own needs and the complexity of the service delivery system, which can make effective service delivery difficult. This difficulty is exacerbated by the sometimes combative nature of relationships between service providers. These issues could be addressed, at least in part, by improved training and stricter guidelines for those working in the sector. Representatives of disability and justice-related agencies in Queensland and Western Australia were interviewed for this research. The findings will be useful to policymakers and those who work in corrections, disability support and related sectors. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2016. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice no. 528: Accessed December 20, 2016 at: http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi528.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi528.pdf Shelf Number: 147306 Keywords: DisabilityDisabled PersonsIntellectually Mentally-Disabled Offenders |
Author: Perry, David Title: On Media Coverage of the Murder of People with Disabilities by Their Caregivers Summary: or this White Paper, we looked at the media coverage of 260 cases of the killing of disabled people by the parents or other caregivers, ultimately narrowing our sample down to 219 cases in which the circumstances were clear. The cases date from January 2011 to December 2015. The cases range from clearly intentional acts of murder to death through neglect; the victims have a wide range of disabilities, and the legal outcomes vary from acquittal or no charge to lengthy prison sentences. Our Goals Identify and assess the patterns in coverage. Analyze how those patterns might contribute to stigmatization of disability and disabled people and even intensify the risks of future crimes. Provide a comparative framework so that journalists covering such a story in their own community might have easily accessible references. Highlight the efforts of the self-advocate community to combat disability stigma, to demand victim-centered stories, and work for change. National data repeatedly indicates that people with disabilities are at higher risk for violent crime than people without disabilities. The deaths of people with disabilities at the hands of caregivers, including parents, is a particularly tragic subset of this broader pattern. Moreover, when journalists cover the deaths of this vulnerable segment of the population, the focus is often directed at the murderer. Journalists, consciously or unconsciously, often write stories that build sympathy for the murderer and the circumstances that led them to their crime, while the person with a disability is erased from the story. We have examined over 200 news reports about cases in North America between 2011-2015 that clearly describe the murder of a victim with a disability by a parent, child, spouse, or unrelated caregiver. Findings At least 219 disabled people were killed by parents and caregivers between 2011 -2015 - an average of approximately a murder a week. This is a very conservative number due to under-reporting and the fact that a victim's disability is not always made public. The real numbers are likely much higher. The killers routinely claim "hardship" as a justification for their acts. The media rarely questions such claims or asks for comment from disability rights organizations, and especially not from people with disabilities themselves. In the drive to explain a killing, the lives of the victims get erased resulting in killer-centered, rather than victim-centered reporting. Spreading the hardship narrative may lead to more violence, rather than changing policy around supports. In many cases, moreover, the narrative is fundamentally not true. Many killers receive little to no prison time. In such cases, perceptions of disability as suffering inform judicial decisions not to punish murder. Best Practices Tell victim-centered stories. Don't just report what the killer says about the victim, which will always be dehumanizing. Do the journalism to find out more about the victims' lives, their desires, their agency. Talk to experts in disability. The disability rights community follows these cases closely and will provide expert commentary. Remember, most caregivers do not kill disabled people, so blaming a killing on disability-related hardship is never the full answer. Challenge the claims of defense attorneys and perpetrators. Investigate whether the claims of defense attorneys and perpetrators are accurate. When prosecutors treat such cases lightly, investigate whether they treat cases involving non-disabled victims the same way. Provide Context. These cases are rare (there are around 450 cases of parents killing children every year in the United States), but not unique. They need to be put in context so the consequences of dehumanizing disabled people can be made visible to the general public. Details: Newton, MA: Ruderman Family Foundation, 2017. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 22, 2017 at: http://www.rudermanfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Murders-by-Caregivers-WP_final_final-2.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.rudermanfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Murders-by-Caregivers-WP_final_final-2.pdf Shelf Number: 145157 Keywords: Disabled PersonsFemicideFilicideHomicideMedia and CrimeMurder |
Author: National Council on Disability Title: Not on the Radar: Sexual Assault of College Students with Disabilities Summary: Sexual assault can be devastating to victims and cause long term physical, psychological, and emotional effects, including depression, post-traumatic stress, thoughts of suicide, flashbacks, and sleep disorders. The issue of sexual assault on college campuses has received increased attention since the 2007 publication of the federally funded College Sexual Assault study, which found that 19 percent of female undergraduates were victims of sexual assault during their time in college. Another recent federally funded study surveyed 23,000 students across nine colleges and universities and found that the prevalence of sexual assault averaged 21 percent for females across the schools. Neither of these studies included disability status as a demographic and, as such, no data was gathered on the prevalence of sexual assault on students with disabilities. However, a recent large-scale study on campus sexual assault by the Association of American Universities revealed that college students with disabilities were victims of sexual violence at higher rates than students without disabilities - 31.6 percent of undergraduate females with disabilities reported nonconsensual sexual contact involving physical force or incapacitation, compared to 18.4 percent of undergraduate females without a disability. This means one out of every three undergraduate students with a disability was a victim of sexual violence on campus. As campuses across the United States work to prevent assaults, educate students on assault prevention, and provide supports for survivors, little is known about how colleges address the accessibility needs of students with disabilities who have suffered a sexual assault, or about the inclusivity of college programs, services, and policies to victims of assault with disabilities. This study set out to investigate the current state of campus sexual assault programs and policies and uncovered multiple barriers to students with disabilities, from reporting crime to receiving needed assistance afterward. The report includes recommendations for Congress, federal agencies, and colleges to improve reporting requirements, training, and policies and procedures to better serve students with disabilities who have experienced sexual assault on campus. Details: Washington, DC: The Council, 2018. 79p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 11, 2018 at: https://ncd.gov/sites/default/files/NCD_Not_on_the_Radar_Accessible_01292018.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://ncd.gov/sites/default/files/NCD_Not_on_the_Radar_Accessible_01292018.pdf Shelf Number: 149758 Keywords: Campus CrimeCampus RapeColleges and UniversitiesDisabilitiesDisabled PersonsSexual Assault |
Author: Perry, David Title: The Ruderman White Paper On Media Coverage of Law Enforcement Use of Force and Disability: A Media Study (2013-2015) and Overview Summary: Disabled individuals make up a third to half of all people killed by law enforcement officers. Disabled individuals make up the majority of those killed in use-of-force cases that attract widespread attention. This is true both for cases deemed illegal or against policy and for those in which officers are ultimately fully exonerated. The media is ignoring the disability component of these stories, or, worse, is telling them in ways that intensify stigma and ableism. When we leave disability out of the conversation or only consider it as an individual medical problem, we miss the ways in which disability intersects with other factors that often lead to police violence. Conversely, when we include disability at the intersection of parallel social issues, we come to understand the issues better, and new solutions emerge. Contents Disability intersects with other factors such as race, class, gender, and sexuality, to magnify degrees of marginalization and increase the risk of violence. When the media ignores or mishandles a major factor, as we contend they generally do with disability, it becomes harder to effect change. This white paper focuses on the three years of media coverage of police violence and disability since the death of a young man with Down syndrome, named Ethan Saylor, in January 2013. After reviewing media coverage of eight selected cases of police violence against individuals with disabilities, the paper reveals the following patterns in the overall data: - Disability goes unmentioned or is listed as an attribute without context. - An impairment is used to evoke pity or sympathy for the victim. - A medical condition or "mental illness" is used to blame victims for their deaths. - In rare instances, we have identified thoughtful examinations of disability from within its social context that reveal the intersecting forces that lead to dangerous use-of-force incidents. Such stories point the way to better models for policing in the future. We conclude by proposing best practices for reporting on disability and police violence. Details: Boston: Ruderman Family Foundation, 2016. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 19, 2018 at: http://rudermanfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/MediaStudy-PoliceDisability_final-final.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://rudermanfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/MediaStudy-PoliceDisability_final-final.pdf Shelf Number: 149860 Keywords: Disabled PersonsMass MediaMediaPolice BrutalityPolice Use of Force |
Author: Hollomotz, Andrea Title: Behaviour that Challenges: Planning services for people with learning disabilities and/or autism who sexually offend Summary: There are people with learning disabilities and/ or autism in every community, some of whom will engage in sexually offending and risky behaviour. Already a highly marginalised group, many will themselves be at risk of exploitation and abuse. Several local, regional and national authorities and multi-agency partnerships have overlapping responsibilities for their health and wellbeing - whether as a statutory duty or because supporting people who are vulnerable is integral to their role. The array of support agencies can be confusing and hard to access - both for individuals with learning disabilities and/ or autism and family members seeking help on their behalf. Early intervention and support can improve outcomes for the individuals themselves, make communities safer and reduce the number of victims, and lessen the high cost of crisis intervention. This briefing paper sets out the case for change: it draws on presentations and discussions from a seminar we held in May 2017. It includes practice examples and suggests practical ways forward and makes recommendations to improve outcomes for some of the most vulnerable citizens in our society. Details: London: Economic and Social Research Council; Prison Reform Trust, 2018. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 26, 2018 at: http://adaptingtreatment.com/files/2018/03/Behaviour-that-challenges.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://adaptingtreatment.com/files/2018/03/Behaviour-that-challenges.pdf Shelf Number: 149897 Keywords: AutismDevelopmental DisabilitiesDisabled PersonsLearning DisabilitiesSex Offender TreatmentSex Offenders |
Author: Maher, Janemaree Title: Women, disability and violence: Barriers to accessing justice: Final Report Summary: This project, Women, disability and violence: Creating access to justice, draws on the insights of 36 women living in New South Wales and Victoria who outlined their experiences of seeking justice and security in the context of violence that they had experienced. As part of their commitment to policy relevant empirically grounded research, Australia's National Research Organisation for Women's Safety (ANROWS) commissioned this research. The project was led by researchers from Monash University and People with Disability Australia, hereafter PWDA (representing Disabled People's Organisations Australia, hereafter DPOA). This research examines how these women worked to seek redress or support and the pathways and obstacles they encountered. This data has been augmented by interviews with 18 service providers from NSW and Victoria working in disability support services and advocacy organisations, domestic and family violence support services, and legal services. This is a qualitative project which limits generalisability: the aim here is to analyse the experiences these specific women have shared and work to identify patterns that emerge. Violence in the context of this project was understood to include physical and sexual violence as well as other forms of abuse such as coercive control, emotional abuse, financial abuse, and physical and social isolation. The majority of the cases captured in this report were instances of domestic and family violence defined broadly as violence occurring within a familial or caring context. It included sexual and physical assaults in a range of social and living environments. In addition, violence was understood to take particular forms such as withholding required medications or aids, limiting access to disability services and/or mainstream service providers and threats related to women's mothering and care-giving roles. Violence that violated women's sexual and reproductive autonomy, including forced or coerced sterilisation was also commonly reported. Avenues to seek desired justice, which may include prevention of future violence, everyday security and safety, and consequences for the perpetrators of violence are complex, as justice services and pathways may not effectively support the access of women with disability. This report reiterates findings that already exist in the public domain. As the context review makes clear, these issues of Executive summary violence and access to justice have been the focus of multiple reviews and interventions within Australia in the last five years. The question of legal capacity for women with disability is still unaddressed. As the Australian Human Rights Commission outlines (AHRC) (2014), all jurisdictions should have a disability strategy underpinned by a national Disability Justice Strategy. Implementation of this strategy should be guided by the following principles: 1. Safety of people with disability and freedom from violence. 2. Effective access to justice for people with disabilities. 3. Non-discrimination. 4. Respect for inherent dignity and individual autonomy including the freedom to make one's own decisions. 5. Full and effective participation and inclusion in the community. Details: Sydney: Australia's National Research Organisation for Women's Safety Limited (ANROWS), 2018. 92p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 27, 2018 at: https://d2c0ikyv46o3b1.cloudfront.net/anrows.org.au/Maher%20et%20al%20Horizons%20Research%20Report.pdf Year: 2018 Country: Australia URL: https://d2c0ikyv46o3b1.cloudfront.net/anrows.org.au/Maher%20et%20al%20Horizons%20Research%20Report.pdf Shelf Number: 149921 Keywords: Disabled PersonsDomestic ViolenceFamily ViolencePeople with DisabilitiesViolence Against Women |
Author: Calero, Samantha Title: The Ruderman White Paper On The Problematization and Criminalization of Children and Young Adults with Non-Apparent Disabilities Summary: Unlike people with visible or apparent disabilities, people with non-apparent disabilities often don't receive the accommodations guaranteed to them under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Due to the "invisible" nature of disabilities like autism, Crohn's disease, chronic fatigue syndrome, dyslexia, or any number of mental illnesses, some behaviors that are a direct result of these disabilities are often seen in school contexts as laziness, inattention, disrespect or defiance. Instead of receiving legally due accommodations for their disabilities, students with non-apparent disabilities are disproportionately labelled problem students. In combination with zero tolerance policies at schools, these students are suspended at disproportionately high rates and ultimately criminalized. The result of this systemic discrimination is that over half of our incarcerated population has a mental illness and another 19-31% have a non-apparent disability, like cognitive or learning disabilities. Our jail and prison systems are effectively warehouses for people with non-apparent disabilities. This problematization and criminalization starts very young-even in preschool. Focus and Findings We examine in detail the disproportionate impact that the School-to-Prison Pipeline, and the Foster-Care-to-Prison Pipeline have on children and youth with non-apparent disabilities. While the effects of these Pipelines are well-known in regards to other minorities, we have found that people with disabilities are over-represented in all the minority groups traditionally impacted by this type of systemic discrimination. These findings suggest that the intersection between disability, in this case specifically non-apparent disability, is a significant factor in systemic discrimination. We also examined the role of trauma in the development of non-apparent disabilities. Trauma-survivors are more likely to develop mental illness and about 35% of them develop learning disabilities. This means that children who have Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) are more likely to be caught up in the School-to-Prison Pipeline. And given that children are very often placed in foster care because of abuse or neglect, these findings about trauma also indicate some of the underlying causes in the Foster-Care-to-Prison Pipeline. To better illustrate the impact of this systemic injustice on individuals, we collected personal statements and vignettes from persons impacted by this discrimination. One contributor's words about these systems that work against our youth captured the injustice of it all very incisively: "... you feel like you're being punished when you haven't committed any crime." Conclusion This systemic violation of the rights of people with non-disabilities, not only impacts the individuals funneled into the to-Prison Pipelines, but disrupts and harms communities by having the stress and discrimination and incarceration burdening and separating families. The long-term consequences of incarceration are devastating given the high recidivism rate (almost 50%) and the lack of supports in place to re-integrate people, especially people with non-apparent disabilities, back into the community. Finally, this system of discrimination also hurts the wider community and tax payers given that it costs more than $140,000 a year to incarcerate a young person, and only about $10,000 to educate them. Therefore every one of us is impacted by this injustice in our communities and we must put an end to it. Disrupting the to-Prison Pipelines with more sensible school discipline policies, greater awareness raising, more support for trauma-survivors, more wide-spread testing for non-apparent disabilities, better supports and education of teachers and school resource officers are among the first steps we can and must take now. Details: Boston: Ruderman Family Foundation, 2017. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 28, 2018 at: http://rudermanfoundation.org/white_papers/criminalization-of-children-with-non-apparent-disabilities/ Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://rudermanfoundation.org/white_papers/criminalization-of-children-with-non-apparent-disabilities/ Shelf Number: 149863 Keywords: DisabilitiesDisabled PersonsSchool SuspensionsSchool-to-Prison-PipelineZero Tolerance Policies |
Author: Herz, Denise Title: Probation Developmental Disabilities Study Summary: n December 2010, Public Counsel and its partners reached a settlement agreement in the case of I.T. v. Los Angeles County with Los Angeles County to reform conditions for youth with developmental disabilities in the juvenile halls, in group homes, and in the family homes under Probation's supervision. The agreement called for Public Counsel and Disability Rights California to monitor implementation of reform efforts for three years following the development of policies and procedures, and training to Probation staff on those policies and procedures. Monitoring activities began in November 2011 and continued through July 2015. The overall goals of the settlement agreement are to ensure that youth with developmental disabilities in the juvenile halls will be immediately and effectively identified; will not be detained longer than others because of the lack of available, appropriate community placements; and will be provided with appropriate services and effective supports to successfully transition back to the community and avoid recidivism and violence. Study Overview At the beginning of the settlement agreement, Public Counsel and Disability Rights California monitored its implementation by visiting the halls and community placements, observations, interviews with key staff, and reviewing data and documents provided by Probation. Public Counsel eventually received funding from the Keck Foundation to conduct a more formal assessment of the work by researchers at California State University Los Angeles. This study had two interrelated tracks: (1) to utilize Probation data collected as part of the settlement agreement, and (2) to conduct meeting observations, interviews, and reviews of documents related to the settlement agreement. Details: Los Angeles, California State University, Los Angeles, 2017. 55p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 31, 2018 at: http://www.juvenilejusticeresearch.com/sites/default/files/2016-12/Probation%20DD%20Report%20FINAL%202016.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.juvenilejusticeresearch.com/sites/default/files/2016-12/Probation%20DD%20Report%20FINAL%202016.pdf Shelf Number: 151325 Keywords: Developmental DisabilitiesDisabled PersonsJuvenile ProbationProbationersYouth Detention |
Author: Great Britain. House of Commons. Petitions Committee Title: Online abuse and the experience of disabled people. First Report of Session 2017-19 Summary: Social media is a means for people to organise, campaign and share experiences. It helps them to access services, manage their careers, shop, date and navigate a society that is too often designed without disabled people in mind. The disabled people we heard from were some of social media's most enthusiastic users. However, their experiences and Katie Price's petition highlight the extreme level of abuse that disabled people receive online-not just on social media, but in online games, web forums, newspaper comments sections and elsewhere. It is shameful that disabled people have had to leave social media whilst their abusers continue unchecked. Self-regulation of social media has failed disabled people. We agree with Katie Price's petition that the law on online abuse is not fit for purpose. Laws which cannot act against fake child pornography designed to mock a disabled child and his family cannot be considered adequate. Online abuse can destroy people's careers, their social lives and do lasting damage to their health. People should not have to avoid their town centre, local park or place of work to avoid sustained abuse, mockery and threats. Online spaces are just as important in the modern world and should be treated as such. Our recommendations focus on the experiences of disabled people as told to us during our inquiry and consultation events. We recognise there is wider work to do on the law on online abuse and the governance of social media. This is being taken up by other Select Committees. Our conclusions and recommendations should be read as a contribution to the conversation around online abuse, disability and the responsibility to ensure that offline and online spaces are safe and inclusive. For our part, our recommendations include: - The Government and social media companies must directly consult with disabled people on digital strategy and hate crime law. It is not enough to just provide alternative formats-though that is crucially important—or consult with self-appointed representatives. - Social media companies need to accept their responsibility for allowing toxic environments to exist unchallenged. They must ensure that their mechanisms and settings for managing content are accessible to and appropriate for all disabled people. They need to be more proactive in searching for and removing hateful and abusive content. They must demonstrate that they have worked in partnership with disabled people to achieve this. - The Government needs to recognise that the way disabled people are often marginalised offline plays a significant part in the abuse they receive online. It needs to challenge stereotypes and prejudices about disabled people, particularly among children and young people, and require proportionate representation of disabled people in its advertising. - Disability hate crime is not fully recognised and perpetrators are not appropriately punished. The law on hate crime must give disabled people the same protections as those who suffer hate crime due to race or religion. - The criminal justice system is too quick to categorise disabled people as "vulnerable". Hostility towards disabled people is often based on a perception that they are an easy target who can't contribute to society. The Government must recognise the links between prejudice against disabled people and their perceived vulnerability. Crimes against disabled people by reason of their disability should be recorded and sentenced as hate crimes. - It must be possible to see if someone has been convicted of a hate crime on the grounds of disability before employing them to work closely with disabled people. If the Government acts on our other recommendations, this should be possible through a Disclosure and Barring Service check. - The Government must review the experience of disabled people when reporting crimes and giving evidence. Too many disabled people have not been treated seriously because frontline officers and staff do not understand disability. Training and support is needed to overcome this. Good practice is too often isolated to a few specially trained police officers and initiatives. - The Government needs to review the law on exploitation within friendships or relationships. Social media companies need to review their processes and provide advice and support for those who identify as needing additional protection. In doing so, both Government and social media companies must consult directly with disabled people and respect their rights to make their own decisions about their lives. Details: London: House of Commons, 2019. 88p. Source: Internet Resource: HC 759: Accessed March 12, 2019 at: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmpetitions/759/759.pdf Year: 2019 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmpetitions/759/759.pdf Shelf Number: 154898 Keywords: Disabled PersonsHate CrimeInternet CrimeOnline VictimizationSocial Media |