Skip to main content
×
×
Home

The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and psychiatry: lessons from the first seven years

  • Nick Glozier (a1)
Abstract
Aims and Method

To extract relevant information for clinicians from reported and/or accessible cases involving psychiatric illness brought under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA). Institutional databases were searched for DDA cases and relevant guidance from case law extracted.

Results

Over half the cases reaching higher courts involve psychiatric illness. A number of decisions provide guidance for clinicians wishing to aid their own patients, and those involved as expert witnesses. These cover which conditions are included as impairments (almost everything in ICD–10), what associated effects are to be considered, and the relevance of comorbidity and treatment. Cases often involve recovery of clinical documents that reveal interesting variation in professional standards.

Clinical Implications

Virtually all patients of psychiatrists in secondary care would be covered by the DDA. Knowledge of this Act could be used to enhance a patient's access to employment and services, and potentially overcome some of the effects of stigmatisation.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and psychiatry: lessons from the first seven years
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and psychiatry: lessons from the first seven years
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and psychiatry: lessons from the first seven years
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
Hide All
American Psychiatric Association (1994) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th edn) (DSM–IV). Washington, DC: APA.
Fazel, S. & Danesh, J. (2002) Serious mental disorder in 23 000 prisoners: a systematic review of 62 surveys. Lancet, 359, 545550.
MacDonald-Wilson, K. L., Rogers, E. S., Massaro, J. M., et al (2002) An investigation into reasonable workplace accommodation for people with psychiatric disabilities: quantitative findings from a multi-site study. Community Mental Health Journal, 38, 3550.
World Health Organization (1992) Tenth Revision of the International Classification of Diseases. Geneva: WHO.
Mr A v. London Borough of Hounslow [1998]. EAT 1155/98.
Abadeh v. British Telecommunications plc [2001] IRLR 24.
Cosgrove v. Caesar & Howie [2002] EATS/0022/02.
Goodwin v. Patent Office [1999] IRLR 4.
Heinz Co Ltd v. Kenrick [2002] IRLR 144 EAT.
Hutchison 3g v. Mason [2003] unreported Appeal No. EAT 0369/03.
Latchman v. Reed Business Information Ltd EAT 1303/00 (unreported).
LB Hammersmith v. Farnsworth [2000] IRLR 691 EAT.
McNicol v. Balfour Beattie Rail Maintenance Ltd [2002] IRLR 711 EAT.
Morgan v. Staffordshire University [2002] IRLR 190.
Murray v. Newham Citizens' Advice Bureau [2003] IRLR 340 EAT.
O'Neill v. Symm & Co Ltd [1998] IRLR 233.
Power v. Panasonic [2003] IRLR151EAT.
Vicary v. British Telecommunications plc [1999] IRLR 680 EAT.
Watkiss v. John Laing plc [reported in Guardian 24 December 1999, pg. 2].
Woodrup v. London Borough of Southwark [2003] IRLR 111 EAT.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

BJPsych Bulletin
  • ISSN: 0955-6036
  • EISSN: 1472-1473
  • URL: /core/journals/bjpsych-bulletin
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 1 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 17 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 2nd January 2018 - 15th July 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and psychiatry: lessons from the first seven years

  • Nick Glozier (a1)
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.

×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *