The issue of discrimination against old people and persons with disabilities is an old age phenomenon. For centuries these groups of people have had to live with stigma and many a times forced t live their lives in seclusion for instance in the bible stories are told of how leapers were forced from their homes to be beggars in the streets as if this was not enough, bells were tied around their necks so that everywhere they would go, people will be warned of their presence by the sounding bells and were required to take-off.
In ancient Africa, children born with disabilities were killed and thrown away in the forest because they were considered bad one. All these treatment by the dominant groups on the marginalized groups was informed by myths. In that it was believed that people’s with disability would bring bad luck or “infect” others in the community who did not have such disabilities.
And for centuries this continued until the dawn of “the age of rights” where it came to be realized that all human beings by virtue of their being humans had all human beings by virtue of their being humans had in alienable God given rights that no man was allowed to take away (L. J. mefarlane. Theory and practice of human rights) The author went on to say about human rights”. They must be distinguished from moral rights in possessing the following characteristics (a) University (b) Individuality (c) Paramount ability
(d) Enforceability This age of rights culminated in the “universal declaration on the rights of man” and the UN charter on the rights of man” This two characters then informed many bill of rights of many states in the world today including “The Canadian charter on human rights” Much though that these rights are clearly s pelt in many international and local documents on human rights the old and people with disability continue to bare the brunt of stigmatization and this surely should urgently be brought to a stop.
this paper boards on the thesis that discrimination of any kind against any person and specifically the old and people with disabilities is an infringement on their fundamentals rights and freedoms as first adumbrated in the universal declaration on the rights of man. It will also compare and contrast the treatment. The international labor organization defines disability in terms of tis effect upon a persons ability to secure and maintain gainful employment.
In convention 1 order 50, of the international labor organization states that a person with disability means one whose prospects of securing, obtaining and a draining in employment is induced or as a result of mental or physical impairment. A careful analysis of this definition can lead to confusion it would also means that ILO is in useful discriminative. It would also mean that old people do suffer from disability an allegation that may not be always true many old people can still work and fend for themselves without needing employment.
Disability can best and without discrimination defined to mean:-An impairment of either of either, physical, sensory or mental nature including vision, hearing or physical impairment which has a longterm effect on a persons usual day to day activities. So that given the effect that comes with old age like loss of memory, poor vision comes with old age like loss of memory, poor vision could also fall under the ambit of disability.
Unfortunately even government agencies do discriminate against peoples with disabilities from how they implement program mes like adjustment orders to make the lives of these people much easier, to how they implement government policies leaves a lot to bee desired. But then should all facts that may seem to be discrimination deemed as such? Because there are actions that can pass for discrimination but may not necessarily be motivated by discrimination.
A good case in point is the latimer case where latimer, a farmer who was working a spread in saskat chewan killed her 12 year old daughter Tracy in 1993. His statement to the police was such that she loved his daughter and could not watch her suffer from severe cerebral palsy. Latimas was subsequently charged with 1st degree murder which was later reduced to 2nd degree murders. justice Ted Noble broke a new legal grand by distinguishing mercy killing which is allowed anyway and cold blooded murder in so doing latrines was given a constitutional exemption.
He was convicted though because he had committed a crime. Acts such as this one are not motivated by discrimination or stigma associated with having a child with disabilities but “love” in fact in the present case, the judge considered latimer as a “loving and protective parent” who wanted to end his daughter suffering. Much that latimers actions can be somehow be “excused”, why would people have to think that people with disabilities would people have to think that people with disabilities are constantly “suffering”, and thus the need by other people to end their suffering?
why cant we allow people with disability lead independent lives? The answer again lies with the perceptions that the dominant group has people with disabilities. On the other hand the leilani must case can only be contrasted with the forgone case of latimer in the present case, Muir was a child who was unwanted and neglected by her mother an alcoholics. the mother took her to mental school at age eleven. the mother also ordered her sterilization during the sterilization she was not informed that she was actually being sterilized but she thought she was having her appendix removed.
She later discovered that she could not sire children and sued. She was awarded damages. the case in point suggest that persons with disabilities should not be allowed to give birth. This is pursuant to the now repealed sterilization act of Alberta coupled with the fact that a person with disability consent is not required where matters dealing with their bodies is concerned or really outrageous and discriminatory granted the confinement of Muir led or amounted to loss of reputation, loss of liberty
machinery be put in place for purposes of evaluating those considerations. Here government in as much as they are charged with the responsibility of ensuring adequate provisions for the rights of persons with disability can claim lack of adequate resources and seek to absolve themselves from liability. This again has mischievous connotations which also violate the rights of persons with disability it is note worthy therefore that the essence of budgetary provisions” is a ploy to run away from responsibility.
Granted, the character would be illusory if the provisions enshrined there in could be ignored because it was convenient to the administration. But courts in Canada should be applauded since they have always held that the “considerations” cannot be used to justify violations of rights of persons with disabilities. In Nova Scotia V Martin it was held for instance that despite the concerns raised with respect to “budgetary considerations” defenses, the defense is raised often and primarily in the context of disability discrimination cases.
Senior citizens have not been spared either and as earlier stated they may fall under the bracket persons with disabilities because old age comes with certain effects like hearing difficulties, poor visions, mental that senility comes with old age all proved by science old peoples normal participation in day to day activities all these has a close nexus as to why they are held with low opinions, that’s why they are held with low opinions, that’s why they are deemed to be less engaged.
the myths that they are less aged could well be founded because more often than not, the senior citizens would citizens would be found in care homes where they are taken care of by welfare but this is not totally true because many old people have defied age to climb the everest mountains ans so on. About mandatory retirement, this is purely discriminative because under the law much that there is a retirement age, many people of retirement age have the energy to carry on. Besides it would be tantamount to say that on attainment of retirement age, one is old and incapable of productivity.
Well is sheer discrimination. this kind of draconian treatment has led to untold suffering among the persons with disabilities. For one it has led to difficulty in access to employment because they are viewed to as being not productive as compared to normal bodied persons. It has also led to poverty or likely hood of the same because many a times there people are confined. take the Muir case for instance her life was almost shuttered leading to loss of productive years, reputation besides suffering humiliation. It has also led to discontent among person with disabilities.
The welfare system has also suffered given draconian policies like “ budgetary considerations” All these can also result to problems of recreation and leisure for persons with disabilities as little regard as given to them as human beings. To change their status quo, lobby groups have been formed to press for better treatment. the senior citizens and persons with disabilities have also gone against the grain to prove the system wrong e. g. Muir who went on to pass the IQ test and lives a much happier life. These groups have also sought redress in court especially invoking section 15(1) of the Canadian charter on human rights.