Tag: #BCHumanRightsTribunal

Posted on

Education Assistant – Employment Human Rights Complaint

I just want to preface this with a message before I even dive into this. Tribunal decisions do not reflect all of the information or the full story. They are not tell all novels. They only highlight the information that they need to legally analyze the discrimination decision. There could be all sorts of stuff that you will never publicly read about.

I don’t typically post decisions regarding education staff as my focus is for parents/caregivers and students. I did write a blog that I think is helpful for education staff filing human rights complaints. However, this decision is unique in that I don’t often see an Education Assistant (EA) human rights complaints in BC. This complaint raises some interesting issues and demonstrates some important procedural fairness accommodations that I think is important for parents/caregivers and students to know about who are considering navigating or currently navigating.

What started this complaint was her disagreement over an Autistic student being excluded from school. It then snowballed into harassment and bullying allegations from Ms. Broe to other staff and staff filed allegations against her.

[14]           Ms. Gowe worked with Ms. Broe at the Secondary School from 2010 to 2018. Ms. Gowe stated that Ms. Broe would often come to her with concerns, and she would try to provide clarification, support, and direction to Ms. Broe about her role. However, Ms. Gowe testified that around the fall of 2017, she became concerned that Ms. Broe was being overly critical of other staff and not staying within the scope of her role as a CEA. Ms. Gowe was also approached by several staff who reported concerns about Ms. Broe’s behaviour. Ms. Gowe began documenting these concerns in case Ms. Broe’s behaviour escalated further.

[15]           From Ms. Broe’s perspective, it was her job to do what she thought was right for the students even if this was perceived as her challenging the decisions of other staff. One example from this period was discussed by several witnesses at the hearing. Ms. Broe testified extensively about a decision made without her input to temporarily remove a student with Autism she worked with from the Secondary School. Ms. Broe felt this was the wrong decision and she needed to take action to return the student to school. Ms. Broe first brought her concerns to a special education teacher, who subsequently approached Ms. Gowe with her own concerns that Ms. Broe was being overly critical of another staff member involved in the decision. Ms. Broe then went to the school Principal and subsequently, feeling that someone had lied to the Principal about the student, reached out to the Director of Support Services at the District, Susan Thomson. Ms. Thomson met with Ms. Broe to listen to her concerns but informed her that the decision had been made by a “darn good team” and she needed to move on. Ms. Gowe testified that she was concerned that Ms. Broe’s actions around this issue were causing stress to other staff and indicated that Ms. Broe was “crossing boundaries” and unable to let things go.

I am aware that if you are an EA and you are advocating on behalf of a student, you can end up putting your head on the chopping block. Even though on paper, documents say that advocating is part of your job, “4.4 Advocate for the protection of the legal and human rights of students and their families“. In reality, that isn’t necessarily so. This is true for teachers as well. A teacher who blogs The Canary Collective wrote about her experience. Her first line in her first blog ” I never imagined that advocating for students would put my career at risk.” She says she was disciplined for advocating.

Regarding this case with the education assistant, I am not going to post all of the details of this case. You can read through it all. It sounds like it’s been a difficult experience for many people involved, including Ms. Broe. This is the third posted public decision in this case. You can find the other two on CanLii.

Broe v. The Board of Education of School District No. 67 (Okanagan Skaha) (No.3), 2025 BCHRT 295

I do want to highlight some hearing procedural items that occurred that I think is important be aware of, to know what is possible.

Flexibility – Procedural Fairness



[49]           Ms. Broe worked hard to represent herself in this complaint. I gave her significant latitude with her testimony, which took place over seven days. Similarly, she was allowed to extensively cross-examine the District’s witnesses, including a full day with Mr. Corday and more than a day with Mr. Burgoyne.

[50]           This was a difficult hearing for Ms. Broe and some of the witnesses involved. One witness expressed that it felt like Ms. Broe was using the Tribunal process to get “revenge” for the events in the complaint. It was clear that revisiting these events was stressful for Ms. Broe, and her emotions were often heightened. Although she had the opportunity to ask questions, and receive answers, from individuals involved in the events leading to this complaint, she expressed that some of the evidence was hurtful and caused her to question her sense of self.

[51]           We took additional breaks as necessary. Ms. Broe was also offered the option of having a support person sit with her throughout the hearing, however the person she identified was not available. Having expressed that seeing Mr. Corday in the virtual hearing room was a trigger for Ms. Broe, he agreed to attend the hearing with his camera turned off, with the exception of when he was providing his testimony.

[52]           Ms. Broe was also given significant latitude with respect to her documentary evidence. Before the hearing, I held a case conference with the parties where we discussed, among other things, how to admit documents at the hearing. I explained that any documents previously submitted to the Tribunal in preliminary applications would not form part of the hearing record, and if a party wanted to introduce a document at the hearing, they had to provide it as part of their book of documents. I confirmed these instructions in writing. The parties agreed to prepare a joint book of documents, which they submitted to the Tribunal a few days before the hearing began.

[53]           On the first day of the hearing, however, Ms. Broe sought to rely on documents that were not included in the joint book of documents and which she had not provided to the Tribunal for the purpose of the hearing. I reminded Ms. Broe of the instructions I had provided and directed her to review all her documents after we had adjourned for the day, submit them to the Tribunal and the District, and we would address any procedural fairness issues the following day. Ms. Broe agreed to follow these instructions.

[54]           The next morning however, she had not provided the documents and expressed that she had not slept and was confused about the process. We revisited the document issue the morning of the third day of hearing, as Ms. Broe again wished to rely on the documents she had not provided according to my instructions. The District’s legal counsel offered a solution: she would send the Tribunal a file containing all the documents Ms. Broe had disclosed to the District in advance of the hearing and would not object to these documents being admitted on the basis of inadequate notice. This allowed the Tribunal to access Ms. Broe’s documents, one by one, as Ms. Broe sought to introduce them. While there were still delays caused by this approach, the District’s cooperation in problem-solving allowed Ms. Broe to present the evidence that she had previously prepared in a manner that made sense to her. I thank legal counsel for her efforts in this regard.

*******

The tribunal is very aware for people filing complaints, this is not an easy process, and many people navigating the process have mental disabilities. It’s stressful and emotional. It is a legal process and by how our legal system is designed, it is adversarial. Most people don’t have lawyers or training in any legal education. Some people are incarcerated while they are navigating this process. For the tribunal, it is their role to make this process as fair as possible for both sides.

If you need something, don’t assume you will get a no. Always ask! You never know what is possible.

The final decision was that her complaint was dismissed. She didn’t meet the legal test for discrimination. You have the burden of proof to prove you were discriminated against, and then if you do that then the respondents need to try to prove that it was justifiable to the point of undue hardship.

*****

[57]           For the reasons that follow, I find that Ms. Broe has not met her burden of proving the elements of her case.

******

Tribunal members who write decisions will sometimes acknowledge that people have been harmed by the events they are describing in their cases. In this case, they did this as well. Which I always appreciate when they do that. I hope that acknowledgement and validation is helpful for people. Human rights decisions also state that negative experiences are not necessarily discrimination. This is a legal test about a very specific act. Discrimination. Not a moral test or honesty test about harmful or unfair events.

In this education case: X by Y v. Board of Education of School District No. Z, 2024 BCHRT 72

[110] ….I accept that these incidents which X relayed to Y were upsetting to X. I appreciate that the interactions may have fed into X’s general feelings of unease at school, but the fact alone that these events may have happened is not enough, in itself, to establish that X’s disability factored into them. Not all negative experiences are discrimination. Even accepting that these incidents occurred, I did not hear evidence that could establish, on a balance of probabilities, that X’s disability was a factor in the conduct of the adults involved in these interactions.

*******

As always, we learn from these decisions. The more information we have, the more we can make informed decisions. Sometimes filing a human rights complaint is incredibly helpful and sometimes it is not the best avenue to heal and process stressful events. Also, tribunal members can also make wrong decisions. I think for a lot of people filing complaints, they just can’t tolerate the injustice or unfairness of what they feel has happened, and they are compelled to do something about it. I hope for everyone involved in this case, they are able to heal, find some peace, and move on.

I wonder what happened to the student who was being excluded…

Posted on

Liability in Education

One aspect of education that was really hard for me to swallow and accept is the concept of liability and education operating as a business. They almost broke my heart over this. They make a lot of decisions based on liability. It’s depressing and sad really. Like seriously….the kids aren’t the priority?? (I was so innocent and trusting when my kids started school.)

They don’t make their decisions by prioritizing “doing the right thing”. This is about money. It’s about insurance.

If you ask them for an investigation into an incident. They will NOT try to find the truth and provide this information to you. They will be conducting their investigation it in a way that reduces their liability. They will hide needles in haystacks. Everything is very performative. They make themselves look busy for you, but nothing leads to any substance. They are experts at this. They do this over and over again. They have this down to a well-oiled machine. (Staff – this is for you too regarding your bullying/harassment complaints. Look for the signs!)

If you want to meet with certain people and they deny you that opportunity to do so, they are saying NO to you because it is too risky and they are concerned it might increase their liability. Depends on what you are dealing with, some situations staff really mess up – this isn’t your typical ignore IEP stuff, they will block you from talking to certain people. They don’t want this person to be on a future witness list at the tribunal. As soon as they engage with you through email or conversation, you could potentially make them a witness. They protect certain people.

They will not give you everything you want in your Freedom of Information request. You will need to file OIPC complaints or application for documents through the human rights process. They certainly will not just lay out all of the evidence to you because you asked for it. They will never provide you documentation that could possibly be used against them in the future. If you are just corresponding with them through email and not a complaint system, there is a very high possibility they will just ignore you.

If you want to have a conversation with them to figure out what on earth happened at school that lead to XYZ. You will not be provided with any information that could harm them later in a tribunal or court. They protect their staff. No government service or private company will ever just provide you the evidence you need to nail them. If you are getting evidence it is because you are prying it out of their cold hands.

We place so much incredible trust in these people. Our children are in their care 5 days a week. This is their present childhood and their future. We want to think that they have their best interest at heart. Teachers are not walking around with a liability lens, but the school administration absolutely are. And so is everyone above them.

This is what drives parents and caregivers up the wall. School admin will be vague, they will lie, they divert and cast blame on your child and you. This is why getting accountability is a fight. But certainly not impossible.

Upper management are constantly assessing you through a cost-risk lens. They have a team of lawyers who are a phone call and email away.

If you are stirring up shit all the way to the top, if they are concerned about you, they have probably already engaged their lawyers. Lawyers are involved way earlier than you will ever expect. And you are getting gaslit and manipulated for a reason. None of this stuff is by accident. They don’t just whoopsie lie to you.

The good news is. And there is good news.

Teach them what your currency is. Give my kids the supports they need and I wont be a risk to you. When they do give your kid the supports they need, they are not doing this because it makes them feel good. Well….maybe some people. But for the higher ups who don’t see your child every day and wouldn’t be able to pick them out of a line up. They are doing this because it is part of their job to reduce the schools liability. They are always considering their damage period. It even states that in the School Act, 95(3)(b) that school staff may need to pay the legal costs if someone sues the school board (human rights complaint) and the school employee has been seriously careless or reckless in how they brought this on. If what they did obviously brought on the legal fees, like a hearing, they could be forced to pay. No employee wants to be in that position to pay for hundreds of thousands of dollars for a hearing. They will shut their mouths. They will hide evidence. No one wants to lose their house. Cost-risk analysis.

We need to be clear. Give my kids their supports and I will be less of a risk.

Don’t give me what my kid needs, and I will become very costly. Both financially, and a drain on the capacity of your staff.

We need to learn to speak their language without being obvious about it.

They don’t really believe the words you use. The threats you make. It just rolls off their back. They get threaten by parents ALLLLLL the time. What RARELY happens, is action. It takes a lot for parents to file complaints. And when they do, you jump into another category in their minds. If you could send them subliminal messages to pick up, you would want to tell them, “I AM EXPENSIVE”. They aren’t listening to your words as much as they are paying attention to YOUR BEHAVOIUR. That! They believe.

You don’t need to kill a fly with a house. You don’t want to seem so ridged that you are not workable. If they think you have gone to far to the dark side (so irate) unable to return and have any collaboration with, their goal will be based on liability of course, and you will be way too expensive. They will do everything in their power to just try to get you to leave.

It’s a fine line we walk.

Using human rights language is a red flag to them. It lets them know, don’t fuck with me. I know my shit. Start off slowly with key words. (Disability-related needs, equitable education, accommodation request). Add due dates for email responses. Escalate to the next level if they don’t respond in time. Communicate to them that you are professional, you will be able to sustain their poking and little games they play, and that you are not going anywhere. Show them by your behaviour and quality emails that you know your advocacy stuff. This is their language. Engage the cost-risk analysis. Being persistent and consistent alerts them.

To school administration, your child is a customer accessing their service. This is a business. Your child is potentially a risk and so are you. Employees have duties to perform and they don’t want risky shit-disturbing-employees either. Employees have a fiduciary duty to their employer. Staff – you do not want to be on the radar of the district. When you are seen as a risky employee they will engage in constructive dismissal techniques. They want to show you who is in charge. They will move you. They will change what grades you are teaching. Constantly. Once all of their liability concerns are addressed, then they seek to fulfill their duty towards the service they need to provide. An education. Within their constraints for all stakeholders, including their duties towards staff, work safe, insurance, the general public, etc.

People talk about advocacy feeling like it is a full-time job, and that this is work. It is work. It does feel like a separate profession with its own skill set. This is not just some social hobby playtime thing that parents do when we are bored or have extra time on our hands. We make time. This is serious shit. We need to learn. We need to grow. We need to get good at this stuff. For people who are new to education advocacy, this blog is probably going to feel pretty yucky to some people. I am so sorry for that. I wish I could protect you, but not talking about the truth is really not going to help you. You’ll just come out of school meetings all confused and probably blame yourself thinking you have done something wrong. No matter how they feel about you, they will not be able to be in a position where they will be allowed to make emotional decisions. It’s not you. It’s not personal. It doesn’t matter who you are. They just want to know if they can control you. It’s about liability. It’s about money and protecting their senior staff first, then shit rolls downhill in education. This is business. Period. And it takes a coordinated effort and a roll out plan. The Ministry isn’t even tracking money being spend on human rights complaints. This is all under their radar.

Show them that you can be expensive. Speak their cost-risk analysis language.

Rights-based advocacy is your key. Learn it. Know it. Breathe it.

Decreasing their liability is their priority. Then comes everything else.

This message will self destruct in 5 seconds.

EDIT TO ADD: Jan 29, 2026

School Protection Program

A human rights decision was posted today referencing the School Protection Program (SPP)

[2] The School Protection Program [SPP] is an insurance program that provides school districts protection against liability imposed by law for damages to third parties, and all costs and expenses incurred in defense of such claims. The SPP engaged Mr. Neufeld’s previous legal counsel to defend Mr. Neufeld in response to the complaint. On February 26, 2024, Mr. Neufeld’s previous legal counsel withdrew their representation of Mr. Neufeld. Mr. Neufeld was provided with access to his previous legal counsel’s file [Legal File] and he proceeded to publish or permit to be published the contents of that file online.

https://www.canlii.org/…/2025bchrt310/2025bchrt310.html

(Interesting decision – and what the SPP was wanting to hide from the public is also very interesting…. https://www.canlii.org/…/2025/2025bchrt64/2025bchrt64.html

So, naturally, it did push me to do some research. When I tell people that lawyers are involved WAY earlier than they suspect, here is the confirmation of that.

See page 10

Schools need to notify SPP immediately of any chance of a potential claim could occur.

Including:

“An allegation of discrimination is made or a claim is threatened for emotional distress, shock, or mental suffering;”

“Advise SPP immediately if legal documents are served (i.e. a Notice of Civil Claim) or if any correspondence is received from the Human Rights Tribunal (i.e. a Human Rights Complaint)”

“There is any indication that a claim may be made. For example, a demand for compensation is received, there is an indication that a person has retained a lawyer, or a legal action is threatened;”

They are instructed to report immediately and “Steps should be taken to secure and preserve any evidence, equipment or machinery involved in the incident. Call SPP.”

Here is the administrators handbook:

https://3cd219fb-e7d2-4f78-a55e-4dec88dd68e5.filesusr.com…

Posted on

Does my Child need to Testify?

The lawyers may tell you they are going to put your child as a witness in the hearing, or hint that your child is going to need to testify, as if this is the natural process. No. There is no guarantee. They may be trying to scare you into a settlement. Just because they may say your child will testify, doesn’t mean it will happen. It doesn’t mean it’s even a smart move on their part.

If your child is old enough and wants to testify, their testimony can benefit your case. The lawyers may say that they are going to take a lengthy amount of time to cross examine your child but then cut it short when they realize your child’s testimony is helping you and not them. Children speaking to their experience can be very moving and compelling. Tribunal members can end up connecting with your child as they testify. Not something the school districts lawyers want to have happen.

Them hinting at you that your child is going to need to testify can be the very thing that ends up shooting themselves in the foot.

How it works for hearings at the BC HRT, they typically plan for 2 witnesses per day. One in the morning, one in the afternoon. So, if you have 10 people on your witness list, including yourself, you will need at least 5 days to present your case. However, your testimony can take as long as you like. You can have written notes in front of you. (Other witnesses cannot. But because you are self-representing you are allowed.) If you need a full day to lay out your experience and show all of the emails and evidence you have, then you can take it. You can have as long as you need. Then the respondents will have their own people and will need to count their additional days. That gives you the idea how long you will need for your hearing. Some witnesses need more or less time, based on their role. Some of your witnesses will overlap. You will be able to ask questions to all of their witnesses just like they will be able to question all of your witnesses and you.

There are two education cases where the students have testified that I have found. The bullying case and the meaningful inquiry case. I have talked to many parents across Canada, and I have NEVER heard of the tribunal forcing any student to testify.

The tribunal makes their decisions in the best interest of the child. If your child wants to testify, it has the potential of being a positive experience for them. Being in a hearing, isn’t horrifying to all people. It’s horrifying to the people who do bad things. I couldn’t wait to testify. It took me all day to testify. It was liberating. I got everything out of me and it was witnessed by someone with authority.

The tribunal is very good at making kids feel comfortable and giving them accommodations, etc. The lawyers would look like complete assholes if they weren’t sensitive to your child during cross examination. (And they don’t want to come off as assholes to the tribunal member.) This isn’t like court cases that you see in the movies where people are dramatic. You will be in your own home, and it will be online. Your child can be in cozy clothes. You can be sitting beside your child the whole time. They can have fidget toys or do anything else that makes them comfortable.

When you are preparing for a hearing, you will have a pre-conference hearing where you will be discussing the witnesses and their relevance. I highly suggest you ask for an agenda for any conference hearings. That way the respondents wont be able to spring topics on you without your knowledge and you can do some research in advance and just be prepared. If you don’t want your child to testify, you can make your case. How do you think testifying could possibly harm them? And can evidence be entered and cross examined in other formats by other means? There are hearings that have taken place and the student didn’t testify, for example in this 2024 decision.

Making the decision for your child to testify is a decision you both are going to need to make. Don’t feel pressure from the lawyers, that your child will be forced to do something they don’t want to do. It’s easy for adults to make assumptions, thinking that your child wont want to participate. But, kids want to help out other kids too. They want to make a difference. They may also be angry or upset about the harm they went through and this can be a healing experience for them too. Something for them to look back on and think….wow, I did that. It can be a bonding experience for you both.

Keep in mind that hearings can take 2-3 years from the time a failed settlement meeting happens. Your child will be older and may view things differently then what they do now. Don’t make things an issue, until they need to be. People may think that having all this time is a bad thing, but it can actually work in your favour. The time gives your child some space and time away from the situation. Also, gives you lots of time to prepare.

Posted on

HR Decisions in Year 2025

Here is a list of the BC human rights decisions related to students and education (K-12) that were posted publicly in the year of 2025. Only 2 decisions show parents/caregivers who had legal counsel, the rest were self-representing parents. These decisions are important as we learn how the tribunal will make decisions about similar issues in the future. They also can help us to elevate our advocacy and understand our rights. These complaints become part of the wider data collection on these issues that the BC HRT collects.

This does not reflect the total cases that were navigating the HRT, just ones that had public decisions. Cases that settle at mediation meetings, often do not have decisions attached to them as mediation meetings are part of the early stages of the complaint process.

January 24, 2025

The Student (by the parent) v. The School District, 2025 BCHRT 17

[1]               In April 2022, the Parent made a complaint against the School District on the Student’s behalf. The complaint alleges that the School District discriminated against the Student regarding its services based on the Student’s mental disability. Specifically, the complaint alleges that the School District failed to accommodate the Student by not providing him with an Education Assistant in one of his classes.

February 4, 2025

Child L (by Mother L) v. BC Ministry of Education, 2025 BCHRT 27

[1]               This is a decision about whether eligibility criteria for a government grant, set out in a regulation, could be a service customarily available to the public.  

February 5th, 2025

The Parent obo the Student v. Meadowridge School Society and another, 2025 BCHRT 29 

[1]               The Parent is the mother of the Student. The Student attended middle school at Meadowridge School Society [Meadowridge]. The complaint alleges that Rhys Clarke, a teacher at Meadowridge, sexually assaulted the Student during an incident in Mr. Clarke’s class, and Meadowridge failed to address the matter appropriately. The complaint says the Student was in a vulnerable position due, in part, to his Chinese ethnicity. The Tribunal accepted the complaint on the grounds of the Student’s race, ancestry, place of origin, and sex.

March 7th, 2025

P (by KD) v. Board of Education of School District No. 61 (Greater Victoria) and another, 2025 BCHRT 62

[2]               P alleges that during the 2019/2020 school year, the respondents did not provide her an appropriate education by refusing her at-home instruction, one-to-one Educational Assistant [EA] support, and not following her Individual Education Plan [IEP]. P also alleges that the Ministry changed the requirements for IEPs which rendered them ineffective. Finally, P alleges that the School District caused her harm by failing to properly address abuse by another student and took her on an inappropriately long walk despite her scoliosis, which caused her pain and swelling.

April 4th, 2025

Child (by Parents) v. Surrey School District No. 36, 2025 BCHRT 85

  Generally, the complaint alleges that the Respondents failed to provide the Child with meaningful and safe access to education. Particularly, the complaint sets out five allegations that the Respondents:

a.      failed to incorporate medically recommended accommodations into the Child’s Individual Education Plan [IEP] in 2019 [IEP Allegation];

b.      failed to consult the Parents in 2018 in formulating the Child’s IEP [Consultation Allegation];

c.      discontinued specialist support for the Child in 2017 [Specialist Support Allegation];

d.      failed to provide the Child with reasonable accommodation to assist them with managing their disabilities [Accommodation Allegation]; and

e.      disciplined the Child in a way that put them at medical risk as a result of their disabilities [Discipline Allegation].  

May 14th, 2025

Parent obo Student v. BC Ministry of Education and another, 2025 BCHRT 112

[1]  The Student is a young Indigenous child who has diagnoses of various mental disabilities. The Parents allege that the School District and the Ministry of Education [Ministry] discriminated against the Student based on her race and mental disabilities when they would not allow her to attend school full-time or participate in school activities with her peers.

No other decisions were posted after the May decision.

We will see what year 2026 brings us….

Here is a page I have created that collects links and decisions for advocacy.

Posted on

A Lighthouse to Those at Sea

My wish is to be a lighthouse keeper.
To be steady, strong, and free.
No matter what the weather is outside
I will always remain and be.

There are many adventurers out there
Sailing the uncharted seas
Many of whom I will never meet
But each of us holds a key

We are all pushing the boundaries
Unwilling to accept oppression
We cannot just bow our heads
And be satisfied with the concession

For the people that we fight for
Deserve a fair chance at life
They experience so much struggle
Exposed to too much strife

I keep the lighthouse burning
Steady, strong, and free
And on calm clear nights, I look out
And what oh what do I see

I see so many other lighthouses
And their keepers lighting the way
We turn the darkness into light
By refusing to go away

No matter the weather outside
Steady, strong as can be
Aligned with our integrity
We will always, always be free

Posted on

What is the Ask? Email Writing for School Advocacy.

Before I jump into the theme of this blog, I do want to mention that if you email someone in the district (head office) and you don’t cc: the principal, the email you send to the district will be sent to the principal of your kids’ school first. They will check in with them before they touch base with you. You might as well cc: the principal in the email anyway, and appear transparent and working in good faith.

I can’t tell you how important it is to get really good at emails. Email is a tool in your toolbox. Knowing how to write emails and who to send them to and include, will help you. For example, to decrease the chance of someone ignoring you, include more than one person in an email. For more info about emails, read Inclusion BC’s manual and Family Support Institute’s email guide.

Always remember that any email you send can be sent to anyone in the district, can be sent to their lawyers, and could end up in a hearing. Emails are not private conversations.

Ok, now back to asking.

A very common thing for people to do when advocating is that they are not clear with their ask. They spill out an emotional story and are often all over the map. (No judgement. I have sent these emails too.) Then they end their email. The reader is left wondering what you are actually asking for. Some people don’t know what they want. All is very common.

What exactly do you want?

When do you want it?

How do you want this to happen?

Putting a clear ask in an email is very important and often overlooked unless you intentionally focus on it.

At the end of every email you send, if you want the school to take action on something, you are going to need a clearly defined request.

I even suggest you explicitly state things that are time sensitive. “This is time sensitive”. There are things that you can be explicitly clear about. The clearer you are, the better, for all involved. Putting a date of when you would like to hear from them can also be helpful. “Could you please respond to me by Friday, September 26th?”

If they are ignoring you, I suggest this page. How to Deal with Schools Giving You the Silent Treatment.

Some emails, it’s unclear if you are even expecting a response, or if you’re just venting at the person or telling them off (which I don’t suggest). If you want them to respond to you, you can say something like, “I look forward to your response”, or I would greatly appreciate a response within the next 3 days.

My suggestions for an email format is:

  1. Start off with a connecting statement. (I hope you are well/thank you for your previous email; I appreciate your follow-up/etc)
  2. State the facts of what has happened. (facts only)
  3. State your concerns (thoughts, feelings, opinions)
  4. State your ask (what do you want to have happen)
  5. End with an appreciative closing statement (I look forward to meeting with you and discussing this further/thank you for your support/etc)

    .

It’s really important that we are very clear on what we are asking for. If we aren’t getting the response from the school, it could be that they aren’t clear on what we are asking for or expecting from them. You want your communication to be ridiculously clear so they can’t wiggle out of it. Even if it seems ridiculously obvious to you what you want from them, just be ridiculously clear.

Never make assumptions, and no one can read your mind.

If you child is telling you things, you need to make that clear. Johnny told me…… Do not assume that you have the whole story. Quite often, you will not. Don’t automatically accuse the teacher of what your child has told you. You will need to do some investigating and be a detective first. So, your first approach is to be curious and inquire, seeking more information. You don’t want them to be defensive and shut down on you. A carefully crafted email could get you the information you are looking for before you make decisions on how you want to resolve the situation.

Never make assumptions.

A blog I highly recommend you read and consider when engaging with education staff is the blog 5 Rules on how to be Untouchable

A mug I saw on social media that makes me laugh. “Dance like no one is watching. Email like it will be read out at a tribunal.”

Posted on

What Does Ableism Look Like in Schools? It Looks Like This!

When a teacher daily allows a student with a learning disability to fail their class, but does not even lift a finger to inform the case manager or parent, that is ableism and its discrimination. Disabled children failing, falling behind and being excluded without accommodations have become the normality of the education system. It’s so common, it is woven into the fabrics of the system.

They just invisibly slip through the cracks, while a detailed IEP sits in a student database system collecting digital dust.

The fact that the Ministry of Education intentionally doesn’t even track information regarding the human rights violations that are occurring across the province is an example of ableism. Disability issues don’t affect them, so they have the privilege to ignore it. Want to know how to systemically keep a marginalized group of people oppressed? Keep them off your radar to begin with. OH…and by the way…the group the people the Ministry of Education are intentionally oppressing, are disabled CHILDREN and their family unit.

What is even more profound is that these teachers who are discriminating are caring people. They love teaching and are inspired by the creations of their students. We think ableist teachers are lurking somewhere in the dark with DON’T CARE tattooed on them, when in fact that simply isn’t the case. When children are ignored and neglected in the education system by good teachers, that is obvious discrimination at its finest. The “other” students get their gifts, and the disabled students get left alone, left behind, and just….left.  There are lovely people out there in the world completely unaware of their own biases and the normality of disabled children failing, just blends in with the wall paper.  It’s not even a big thing. It’s just something that happens. Shrug.

This is very common in the education system, and the ableism these kids experience is then internalized, becomes part of their self-concept, self-esteem and identity. Want to know why kids turn to drugs and crime? Failure in the education system has been proven to be foundational in many of the peer reviewed journal articles. IT’s not that we do not know. It’s not that more studies are need to be done. We have all the information. Government is just biased, ableist and discriminatory and this shows in their government run and funded education system. It oozes out of the pores of all 60 school districts. It’s not obvious to the people who are not impacted by it. You need to look at the system and not just focus on what is there, but what is missing. Who is missing?

We need to flip this education system upside down and inside out. The future of their lives and our society depends on it.

Ministry of Education- It is time for anti-ableism leadership from your government.

Are we on your radar? Or will we continually be swept under the rug?

Posted on

Why a Diagnosis

Why a Diagnosis?

I worked as a school secretary and one day one of the teachers needed support from the principal for one of her students in the class. The principal was new and so she quickly went to the student files, plucked out the child’s file, flipped through it to make sure there wasn’t something she needed to know and then flew off to the class.  I realized in that moment that I should have something written confirmed by my child’s professional of their diagnosis, and not just have this info in emails and verbal conversation. If anything happened at the school, a staff member would check the file and they would be aware.  Wow, I have been SOOOOO thankful that I had that exposure and followed through in making sure that documents were in place for both of my children.

As you can see HERE on the BC Human Rights Clinic page they state:

“In a case called Matheson,[4] Ms. Matheson filed a human rights complaint alleging that she was subjected to abusive behaviour from a supervisor. She had a history of anxiety and panic attacks as well as depression. On two occasions during her employment, Ms. Matheson informed her employer that she was suffering from “stress.” However, she did not provide any medical information that said she had a mental disability.”

The Tribunal dismissed Ms. Matheson’s complaint, stating that “an essential element of a complaint of discrimination in employment on the basis of mental disability is proof that the complainant either had a mental disability… or was perceived to be mentally disabled by the employer.” Click HERE for her case.

Matheson’s case was dismissed because she did not inform her employer (school district) of her disability.  If we do not have a written diagnosis in their student file with the school, as a parent if you file a human rights complaint, the respondents (school district’s legal representation) will cite the Matheson case and your human rights complaint will be dismissed.

We have got to get our kids formally officially diagnosed by proper professionals or your child has no legal human rights ground to stand on.

We need this diagnosis for the following reasons:

  1. Legal human rights processes
  2. Application for disability tax benefits (if applicable)
  3. Navigating the health system for proper medical care
  4. Advocacy in the education system for proper accommodations
  5. Social and emotional reasons – so parents are not blamed for having poor parenting skills and they are able to find other parents who have children with the same disabilities and get support.
  6. For the child – so they understand why they are having specific challenges and they don’t blame themselves for the wrong reasons. For acceptance and self-esteem reasons.

******************************************************

Here is the wisdom, lived experience, and reflections from parents of children in the education system across BC. Thank you to all who were willing to share.

It’s a diagnosis not a label. I find once my kids knew why things were hard they stopped labelling themselves “stupid, lazy, dumb.”

  • Anonymous

I think a diagnosis helps us to know ourselves….better. it’s been a breath of fresh air to me personally and has helped me forgive myself a bit easier. It’s also helped me identify things that work and don’t work.

On a wider societal scale: .for ADHD, there’s so much stigma, misinformation, out there it’s hard to feel comfortable disclosing..

I ask myself why would I hide my identity/diagnosis? Why do I feel so scared of sharing?

Obvs cuz we are likely to be met with incredulity of “you aren’t that disabled” or they treat you as less than, and that is hard because-as XXXXX said they have power over us.

What they do with that information is the concern….the biases that come into play when they have that information in hand.

But I also know that being loud and proud and dispelling the myths of the neurodivergence I personally have, perhaps can help open the doors for folks around me.

However, I don’t speak from an intersectional voice (I mean not just “being female”). And as such I hope to be an ally to those who do and amplify their voices.

Because there’s even more work to be done there.

My hope is one day everyone can be loud and proud about themselves.

  • Chantelle Movay

And yet WHY should we have to make our private medical information public/known to people who have power over us in order to get support and accommodation? The idea that we have to out ourselves to be able to make a claim is problematic.

  • Anonymous

Our son was diagnosed in 2018 and since then we have seen a world of difference. Because of his formal diagnosis, we were able to get him the support he needed at daycare (1:1) and now in school. He lacked social skills and would only parallel play with his peers but because of his Supports & EAs he has flourished and now plays really well with his peers. The diagnosis has also given him access to speech therapy within the school, an IEP and other tools/resources to help him succeed.

  • Elena Lawson

Human Rights expects this in order for you to be entitled to accommodations. I know that is why it is critical and needed. As for my own child, in general professionals have never been able to give accurate recommendations. People can see “autism” and think they know what my son needs. But then surprise PDA, you actually don’t know shit.

  • Anonymous

I am relieved that you bright this to light. Accommodations and supports/ language/ professional and so on will never be enough. For our family it has been lifesaving – literally. We have found the most inspiring family’s that we could ever ask for. I am grateful for that. 😊

  • Anonymous

Having an early diagnosis for our older child led to assessments and diagnoses for all of us. That has led into participating in groups with others who started traveling the road before us and getting recommendations which, we wouldn’t have heard otherwise. I can’t imagine what family life would be like for us now without that first diagnosis and learning about other options to parenting from mainstream expectations. It’s hard enough as it is, but that would have been awful. In fact, I’m not sure our marriage would have survived. I’m not sure how my partner would have survived mental health crises. Having diagnoses has led to support options through their online school which would not have been available otherwise and which we wouldn’t have been able to provide out of our own limited finances.

  • Anonymous

We had our youngest diagnosed in grade one despite all the comments of “don’t give her a label” from relatives, friends and school admin. It was by far the best thing we ever did to put us on a path of understanding and acceptance. It has led to success in academics and my daughter has become a strong advocate for her needs. There are still some road blocks because of the severity of her Learning Disability but she is well equipped to find solutions to her issues.

  • Cathy McMillian

Without documentation of dx, we run the risk of trying to reinvent the wheel every year. Let’s channel the energy and hopefully the enthusiasm to what works. As well, if everyone could get accommodations by saying junior needs extra time or a scribe or oral exams …. We have to have a measurement or standard

  • Shannon Saunders

Socio-economic privilege provides access to diagnosis. Families in lower classes, disproportionately single parent households, are not provided with this same access. There are additional attitudinal barriers and medical bias that plays into even accessing the inequitable public system, along with personal barriers that are not supported (eg. difficulty navigating fragmented systems). BIPOC children are more likely to be written of as a behavior or family problem, without access to robust multidisciplinary assessment. Assessment and diagnosis are important for many many reasons. But using it as a gate to equity and support puts our most vulnerable families at risk.

  • Anonymous

A diagnosis made it easier for my child to qualify for accommodations in university. Without those accommodations he would struggle to succeed.

  • Anonymous

We missed out on so much due to lack of knowledge of dx and teen attempting suicide and spending 3 weeks in hospital as a result. I’m soooooo very mad at family doctor, psychiatrist, walk-in-clinics, counselors, school, and MCFD. Since dix, I have learned so much more

  • Anonymous

I value this as a way to deflect personal views..refer to medical i always said..but had teachers say we are the professionals..sigh..and another district learning support principal say we dont need reports to know what your child needs..had psychologists come to school to vocalize need..no go on supports..went online..but if we wanted to fight. Yes. Diagnosis would help. Thanks for your efforts..i feel our situation was uniquely bizarre..but sought to leave ir rather than put our girl as psychologist recommended.take her off the battleground..

-Anonymous

The arguing over why certain things were happening and why our child’s behaviour was being blamed on a personality flaw at school was putting our marriage under incredible strain. It was eating away at our son’s self esteem and identity. Once we got a diagnosis everything changed. Not only was he diagnosed but it led to my husband being diagnosed. We all understood and could learn and advocate. The blame and guilt game ended. Proper diagnosis is so essential for life.

  • Anonymous

long story short having documentation changes much of nothing when it comes to public school system. At the end of report from psychologist was around 10 recommendations, a big one was my kid needing 1:1 ea, bell to bell, never happened. Another was he should attend full days of K, never happened. That during school work he should have someone to scribe and or read for him, that happened when convenient for staff. Basically none of the recommendations were used. I had a OT spend an entire day at school, he had lots of good ideas and he too had recommendations, school didn’t follow any of them. His IEP, really was a piece of paper that brought in funding to the district. When my kid was in gr 5 he was at a gr 2 level academically, they tried telling me he was grade level. They say what you want to hear, when your gone, well sadly kids are not treated very well.

They destroyed his self esteem. Two mths in gr 5 I pulled him out of public school, he is about to graduate in a couple weeks and with his Dogwood diploma and he is a A/B student. All of his success no thanks to public school.

Anonymous

Posted on

Trying to Collaborate in Good Faith

Trying to collaborate in good faith and discuss “reasonable accommodations” can be the real murky (stressful) part of the accommodation process that has the most potential for disaster.

This is where we are at our most vulnerable.

Here is why.

(Please read every single word of the next paragraph. Twice if necessary.)

As part of the duty to accommodate, both parties are expected to collaborate in good faith. The accommodations offered by the school don’t need to be perfect or ideal for our children; they just need to be reasonable enough for them to be able to access their education. (Whatever that means.) Even though they have to meaningfully consult with us, the school gets to decide what is reasonable. We need to engage in the accommodation process and have a conversation about whether we think their suggestions for reasonable accommodations are going to work. They have the final decision-making power. Even if we don’t agree, if they draw the line in the sand and say this is it. We have the duty to facilitate that decision. Even if we think it is going to harm our kid. Then if it does harm our kid, we have to document it, and the conversation starts all over again. All the while, we need to be civil and can’t lose our shit. If they frustrate us and we shut down and stop engaging, we will have “frustrated the accommodation process”. In an employment situation, they can have your human rights complaint dismissed. However, this important case [L.B.v. Toronto School Board, para 77 (c)(d)], shows that in the education context, even without parental authority, the school still has to fulfill their legal obligations to your child. Just be prepared, they will blame you for everything if you file a human rights complaint. Well…. they always seem to do that anyway…but still. This case will be helpful.

Sounds fun eh?

If you are ready to rip your hair out, it’s not you. It’s them. They know exactly what they are doing as they drag you onto the hamster wheel and make you run and run and run. (Maybe the teachers aren’t in the know of these strategies, but the admin are.)

There are ways to get yourself off the hamster wheel.

These are not in any order of importance. Just a list of strategies to consider.

  1. Question and document their delay strategies as them not working in good faith. Or any other nonsense they do. You aren’t the only one who has to be collaborative. Delay strategies, ignoring you, dismissing your concerns, is not collaboration. How you question them will be the art of advocacy as to communicate what you are noticing, but not become adversarial.
    • Keep and log every email that they didn’t respond to and every meeting that was cancelled and delayed
    • Keep a timeline for how long things are taking the harm because of the delay
    • Email the list of concerns you have, and note the ones that have not been addressed or have a proposed resolution plan.
    • When you email, you can use the word “notice”. I have noticed that it’s been 3 weeks for us to have a proposed solution to my concerns outlined in my email Nov 12th: Concerns for XXXXX.
    • Another phrase that is good: “It is to my understanding….” And then state what you think, and seek clarification. Is my understanding correct?
    • Email sentences to use: “I am noticing….”, “It is to my understanding that….”, “Is it correct to assume…..” or “I am confused, can you please clarify…..”
      .
  2. Question the reasonableness of their accommodation suggestions – Ask for evidence. Without using the word evidence. If they want to argue that they are providing your child reasonable accommodations to the tribunal, they are going to need to have EVIDENCE to show that.
    • Again, we are using emails as our tool here as documenting is sooooo very important. We absolutely want to communicate in emails. If they don’t want to communicate with you in emails, that is a red flag. (They are up to funky-monkey business, and they know it.) One way of asking for evidence is to say, can you explain to me how this accommodation works for XXXXX? It is extremely reasonable as a parent to want to understand how their plan is going to provide “the ramp”. Ask questions, get them to explain it to you. Don’t let them use vague language. Keep asking questions until you understand exactly what they are talking about. They will use fancy-pancy language with you, hoping to intimidate you. You have every right to understand exactly what they are talking about. If they are not using plain language and instead use jargon, that doesn’t make them look good. What is the point of communicating with each other if we don’t understand what we mean?
      .
  3. Always ask HOW questions. They state your child does _______. Great. HOW does that happen? How. How. How.
    • The tribunal has stated in human rights complaints that the school is in the best position to have discretion to create your child’s education plan, so if they are the experts, then they better behave like the experts. It is their responsibility to investigate why your child is struggling and create a plan on how to remove the barriers. It’s called meaningful inquiry.
      .
  4. File external complaints. Many parents threaten all sorts of things, and quite frankly, not many people do it. They are used to hearing every threat under the sun, and they just sit back and wait for you to explode and leave. If you file a complaint, you will stick out to them. They will underestimate you, until you show them with your behaviour that you are not a doormat. Sometimes, bringing in external eyes and forcing them to provide evidence to someone that they are fulfilling their legal obligations is exactly what needs to happen.
    • All of the external complaint departments are silos. They are VERY specific to the issue you are dealing with. A lot of the time, people could file with all of them as they are possibly dealing with overlapping issues, but not always.
    • To understand which external complaint deals with what issue, please read my page, Resolution Options in Education
    • Also, When should I file?
    • Why does this strategy work? The Damage Period
    • When you should file is basically asking the question to yourself – if, after giving advocacy a chance, what are you willing to tolerate or not tolerate? When will it be enough? Only you can answer that question.
      .
  5. Section 11. In action – not making a decision is making a decision. The School Act Section 11 notes that a lack of a decision is still a decision. If the school is making a decision that “significantly affects the education, health or safety of a student,” you can appeal to the Board of Education.
    • To read more about this INTERNAL advocacy route, please read my page Section 11 – Appeal to the Board of Education
    • Telling the superintendent that you intend to file a Section 11 appeal should at least get you meetings with people in upper management.
    • Not many parents complain past the principal. So again, pulling in district eyes to your child’s school may be necessary. Some principals think they are untouchable. Sometimes we need to remind them that everyone has to answer to someone. It’s kind of how our society works. No one should be untouchable.
      .
  6. Leave if you can. This is an absolute option to consider. There are a lot of parents who feel that if they leave, then “they will win”. This is the emotional well-being of your child. The best revenge is living well. This isn’t a competition. Take your kid and give them something better. Sometimes the fight is worth it, and sometimes it is not. There is nothing wrong with making your child and yourself the priority. They don’t deserve your energy. There is nothing wrong with moving schools or considering other learning options.
    • I say this as someone who is an absolute fighter. My kids were getting better care when I started filing complaints than compared to when I wasn’t. So, for my situation, it was absolutely worth it to stay. Filing complaints is a form of advocacy to push the line, create needed data and change. We need people willing to get in the ring. At the same time, if you need permission to save yourselves and focus on the health of your family, you have got it. I’ll absolutely give it to you. Depends on what your history is or current life issues, sometimes fighting the abusive people in the education system isn’t your journey to take. In the same breath, “Sometimes it is the people no one can imagine anything of who do the things no one can imagine.” ― Alan Turing.
    • No one else can make this decision but you. These aren’t easy decisions as they will impact your child, your family, and you. People just want to be told what to do. I can’t tell you what to do. This is your family, your life. Only you will experience and witness the benefits and consequences of your decisions. Whatever you decide, I hope you find peace.
      .

In summary, the collaboration process can be a case-by-case part that isn’t written in stone and will be very specific to your child. For this reason, there isn’t a cookie-cutter instruction manual on what exactly you need to be doing next. Some people are very collaborative and other people are focused on control and are not collaborative at all. A lot of it will depend on your own resources, perception, values, priorities, and personal situations. For that reason, the uncertainty causes families a lot of stress, and they are terrified of making a mistake. I absolutely encourage you to reach out to support groups, counselling, advocacy coaches and non-profit organizations that offer support. Don’t do this alone. You want to lessen your suffering? Reach out to others. You have a community out there who can sit in front of you and say “me too”.

Posted on

Why Can’t we Just Sue the Government?

Good question!

Many parent(s)/guardians are asking this question. What they are experiencing in the education system is mass systemic discrimination and they are wondering how in the world is this allowed to happen?? Doesn’t the Charter protect our rights?

Let’s tear this question to bits.

Why can’t we just sue the government?

Funding

  1. A large majority of parents who want to sue the government is because of lack of funding. They want more money from the government to be spent on their children.
    .

When you sue the government it needs to meet a specific legal test. We can’t just sue for lack of funding. If we could, any non-profit organization that felt they weren’t getting enough funding would be suing. That would be all of them. All non-profit organizations of marginalized community groups need more funding and feel they are never getting enough to service their community who are facing lots of discriminatory situations. They are all understaffed. All competing for grants. All desperate. All good and worthy causes. All justified. Yet still… not getting the funding to meet the needs of their community. Keep reading, I’ll explain further.

Quality of Life

2. Something to keep in mind, the government doesn’t owe us a certain standard of living. There is no legislation or law on this. We know this because people are sleeping on the streets and they can’t sue the government for being in that position.

Democracy & Charter of Rights

3. Our government works as a democracy. The system that we have to express our dislike over how the government spends our money, is through voting, contacting your MLA, or peaceful protesting. Other social movement activities like signing petitions, or starting your own non-profit organizations to work with other community members to advocate are all “system” approved ways of furthering your cause. As we will read below in case law, courts will not tell the government how to spend their money when it’s connected to resources in dealing with inequity. The government is allowed to take a “one-step” at a time approach when addressing issues of inequality. They are allowed to determine how to spend society’s limited resources and create social policy when choosing between disadvantaged groups. Something to keep in mind, our system is set up as a separation of powers between the government and the court system. The “conversation” that happens back and forth between courts and the government creating laws is often referred to as the democratic dialogue. See the two Supreme Court of Canada decisions related to Charter Challenges below.

Newfoundland (Treasury Board) v. N.A.P.E., 2004 SCC 66 (CanLII), [2004] 3 SCR 381

[75] [I]t is not realistic for the Court to assume that there are unlimited funds to address the needs of all.”

[79] While purely financial considerations are not sufficient to justify the infringement of Charter rights, they are relevant to determining the standard of deference for the test of minimal impairment when reviewing legislation which is enacted for a purpose which is not financial.

[83] It is also clear that while financial considerations alone may not justify Charter infringements . . . governments must be afforded wide latitude to determine the proper distribution of resources in society . . .  This is especially true where Parliament, in providing specific social benefits, has to choose between disadvantaged groups . . . .

Fraser V. Canada [2020] SCC 28

[ 207 ]                      Governments must be afforded the latitude to act incrementally when addressing a deeply ingrained, complex and persistent social phenomenon such as inequality. (This assumes that the inequality arises from factors in society; where the government itself has created the inequality, matters are, as we have already indicated, somewhat different.) There are processes by which a government must set its priorities, allocate its budget, and obtain parliamentary approval of its programs. In designing legislation to address a particular equality issue, a government can draw on far more internal and external expertise than we judges can. As a result, it is better positioned than we are to appreciate the consequences of a particular course of law‑making, both upon society and upon public resources. With these practical realities in mind, we must also recognize that, were a government expected to remove all inequalities for all groups on every occasion it acted, it may be disinclined to act, given that any remedial scheme will inevitably be under‑inclusive in some respect. Governments would, understandably, become “reluctant to create any new [remedial] benefit schemes because their limits would depend on an accurate prediction of the outcome of court proceedings under s. 15(1) of the Charter ” ( Egan v. Canada , [1995] 2 SCR 513, at para. 104, per Sopinka J.).

[ 208 ]                      To avoid this chilling effect, and to encourage governments to enact remedial legislation addressing pre‑existing disadvantage, this Court has (until now) judiciously accepted that governments may implement reforms “one step at a time, [and] address[s ] [the reforms] to the phase of the problem which seems most acute to the legislative mind” ( R. v. Edwards Books and Art Ltd. , [1986] 2 SCR 713, at p. 772, quoting Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma , 348 US 483 (1955), at p. The focal point in assessing remedial legislation is not to ask whether the government has met “the gold standard” ( Auton , at para. 62; see also paras. 59-61), but to recognize that government should not be obliged to deal with all aspects of a problem at once. It must surely be permitted to take incremental measures. It must be given reasonable leeway to deal with problems one step at a time, to balance possible inequalities under the law against other inequalities resulting from the adoption of a course of action, and to take account of the difficulties, whether social, economic or budgetary , that would arise if it attempted to deal with social and economic problems in their entirety, assuming such problems can ever be perceived in their entirety. [Emphasis added.]

[ 213 ] …..This is because only legislatures have the institutional capacity to conduct the research and study necessary to assess how, and at what pace, its resources should be applied to most effectively address a particular pre‑existing equality issue (and ultimately, to oversee that implementation) . Courts are not well placed to define the nature and scope of an obligation to enact 
sufficiently remedial legislation (Ferrel v. Ontario (Attorney General) (1998), 42 OR (3d) 97 (CA), at p. 113).

[229 ] Similar issues will undoubtedly arise with any other social welfare legislation or government attempts to remedy systemic disadvantage. By reserving the right to arbitrarily second‑guess and undo any legislation that attempts to incrementally address systemic disadvantage, the Court makes it more practically difficult for legislatures and governments to implement policies that promote equality. Put simply, we see restricting the government’s ability to incrementally address disadvantage as a peculiar way to promote equality.

Human Rights Cases Involving Ministry of Education

4. Every single human rights case that I have read across Canada, that has included the provincial Ministry of Education in their complaint, has been dismissed. If their complaint continues, the Ministry of Education is never involved. I haven’t read one case where the Ministry of Education was included. The Ministry gives the funding to the districts and the districts decide how to allocate the money, which removes the Ministry of Education from decisions that would pull them into the human rights complaints about kids not accessing needed resources.

5. I know someone who had the opportunity to consult a lawyer regarding this matter. They were told a way to file a class action human rights complaint that could involve the Ministry of Education is if the Ministry have policy that is discriminatory. This route is still possible if they do this. Here is an example of this in a Charter court case that took place in Alberta. Kerber v Alberta, 2025 ABKB 98 

Human Rights Process

6. I have been asked, why can’t we just file a class action human rights complaint against the Ministry of Education? So we have established, it would need to be something like a discriminatory policy in order for it to be connected to the Ministry. If there is a group of parents who want to file a class action human rights complaint who wants to create a decision from the tribunal, we would need to find a group of parents who were potentially prepared for a 8-10-year fight. Right now, just for a single complaint to reach a hearing level at the BC HRT, it will take about 4-5 years according to flow chart produced by the BC Human Rights Clinic. It could take a year for the tribunal to write a decision, if not more. This case took 15 months for the tribunal to write up the decision. Especially if it was a class-action human rights complaint it could be long and complex. Class action lawsuits tend to be long. Lawyers fees for one parent I know, was given an estimate for $30,000 for hearing preparation and a $10,000 per day for a hearing. The school district lawyer will know your resources for lawyer fees are limited and they will do everything they can to drive up your lawyer costs. So this group of parents would need to be prepared to spend thousands and thousands of dollars, agree to not accept any settlement, and continue along to a hearing. OR they would need to be ready to self-represent themselves. OR they could find a unicorn of a lawyer willing to do pro-bono work. (So many parents have had their pro-bono lawyer drop them before a hearing. We would need to find someone willing to commit for the long haul for free.) After the BC HRT decision is posted, the Ministry could possibly file a Judicial Review after the decision. With a class action decision, the compensation money might be large enough or the precedent be enough that the school districts lawyers would view it worthwhile to pursue further a Judicial Review. That would launch it now to the BC Supreme Court. Even with all that, a policy change would affect only those impacted by the policy and wouldn’t make the systemic change that parents are looking for when they ask the question, why can’t we just sue the government? (Which typically means, how do we get more funding?) If parents want a policy change, I wonder if it would be best to file a single complaint and get the policy change during a settlement mediation meeting. It would be so much faster and they could get the policy change that they need much faster so it could impact their children. Not 10 years later. However, that would just be a policy change within their district, and not provincially. The very system that is intended to resolve discriminatory issues can be a barrier itself.

Courts & Education

7. Generally, the courts don’t like education cases. It depends on what you are suing for and what the legal test is.

For example: Educational Malpractice

Gould v. Regina (East) School Division No. 77, 1996 CanLII 6807 (SK KB)

“The courts are an inappropriate forum to test the
efficacy of educational programs and pedagogical methods.
That judicial interference would be the inevitable result of
the recognition of a legal duty of care is clear from the fact
that in presenting their case, plaintiffs would, of necessity,
call upon jurors to decide whether they should have been
taught one subject instead of another, or whether one teaching
method was more appropriate than another, or whether certain
tests should have been administered or test results
interpreted in one way rather than another, and so on, ad
infinitum.  It simply is not within the judicial function to
evaluate conflicting theories of how best to educate.  Even if
it were possible to determine with exactitude the pedagogical
course to follow with respect to particular individuals, yet
another problem would arise.  Public education involves an
inherent stress between taking action to satisfy the
educational needs of the individual student and the needs of
the student body as a whole. It is not for the courts to
determine how best to utilize scarce educational resources to
achieve these sometimes conflicting objectives.  Simply
stated, the recognition of a cause of action sounding in
negligence to recover for “educational malpractice” would
impermissibly require the courts to oversee the administration
of the State’s public school system.“

Costs & Risk

8. If we did want to try and sue the government via the court system and not the human rights route, we would need to be prepared for it to possibly be tossed out. That wouldn’t be such a bad risk to take, however, if we lose the respondents will ask the courts that we pay their legal fees. Which can happen for the losing party in court cases. You’ll want to read this link. Costs are awarded to the successful party.

The Charter – Limited

9. What I learned from my human rights law class was that we don’t just have open-ended rights under the Charter, our rights are how they are DEFINED under the Charter. And that is case law. Case law tells us how our rights to not be discriminated against is defined. An example of this definition is the case Eaton v. Brant County Board of Education, 1997 CanLII 366 (SCC), [1997] 1 SCR 241. This case famously defined reasonable accommodations and separate classes for students with a disability as a reasonable accommodation due to what is considered reasonable and best interest of the child. All of the human rights cases that make it to hearings are what define our rights under the law too. These definitions and interpretations of law are important. (Duty to accommodate) Each decision defines our rights.

10. Also an important part of the Charter to understand is Section One – Reasonable Limits. The purpose of this “Section 1 effects a balance between the rights of the individual and the interests of society by permitting limits to be placed on guaranteed rights and freedoms. “Most modern constitutions recognize that rights are not absolute and can be limited if this is necessary to achieve an important objective and if the limit is appropriately tailored, or proportionate.” (Canada (Attorney General) v. JTI-Macdonald Corp., [2007] 2 SCR 610, at paragraph 36).”

To take a Charter challenge all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada it would be a 10-year fight, we would need a pro bono lawyer, and based on the case law I have seen, I am not aware of any case law that would be substantial in helping us to force the government to increase funding and resources for kids with disabilities in education.

11. Law isn’t the magic bullet that people tend to think it is. Laws can come into force but they need to be APPLIED for them to have an impact. That means that advocacy around using these laws will still need to happen. Law is a tool for us to use. The system needs to uphold these laws through its systems and accountability design. If the system doesn’t uphold a new law, it won’t be the magic we want it to be. We have laws that say it’s illegal to discriminate, and yet it still happens every day. We still need to change people’s hearts and minds. Law is a start, but it is just the beginning of the work. We need to take these laws and apply them. Laws won’t fix everything, but they are hugely important. We need a social movement AND laws. We need to use every avenue we have. I think of the parachute activities I used to play with my kids at Strong Start centers. We’d all have a piece of the very large parachute to hold onto and put the ball in and bounce it around. We all need to lift and do the work together if we want to keep the ball of inclusion on the parachute. We all need to be in our own corners, all lifting together simultaneously. All of the work done at BCCPAC, parent advocacy groups, advocacy organizations, human rights work, BC Ed Access, School Trustees, BCTF, Teacher’s unions, Post-secondary teacher education programs, EA programs, Professional Support Staff, Counsellors, Ministry of Education and Child Care, accessibility committees, and individual parents, all of us.

So now what?

This part is my opinion and experience. The soft spot of the education system is money. The people in power care about money.

It needs to become more expensive and time-consuming to deal with the consequences of discriminating against students with disabilities. Providing an inclusive education needs to become easier and less expensive. Which means to me, through my lens…. human rights complaints. LOTS OF THEM.

I can tell you 100%, and I have witnessed these meetings, that when systems get too many human rights complaints and their litigation costs go through the roof, then and only then do they start to look at how they can make policy changes to reduce the number of human rights complaints. I don’t care what their motivation is, the results are still the same. Policy in the right direction. Staff training. This is what it seems to take.

Human Rights complaints have the potential of being very expensive, as we advance the purpose of the Code and create those gold nugget decisions.

Dealing with ableism is slow and painful work. But necessary. Social movements are like that.

Every little bit of advocacy we do, all adds up. It all matters. Every bit of human rights law advancements, every decision, every DPAC inclusion meeting, every email to your MLA or school Trustee, every advocacy advancement you make, every time you support another parent. All of it.

We need an army of informed and empowered parents, spreading out and reaching all the corners of the province.

For those of you who are willing and able to get in the ring and make discrimination expensive, hats off to you, we need you. File away.

SOCIAL MOVEMENT + HUMAN RIGHTS LAW = MORE EQUITY, LESS ABLEISM

If anyone wants to consult with an lawyer who specializes in education, I recommend https://www.kesarilaw.com/