Tag: ableism

New HR Decision… and it’s LOADED

ooohhhh gather around for this one!

Lots of interesting learnings in this decision.

Thank you, thank you, thank you to the parent who brought this decision forward.

It was a win for them personally and a win for us for this analysis.

Here we go. This is an exclusion case & Indigenous rights.

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

There is a lot in here, so I am going to list the important parts that I see.

  1. Ministerial order analysis
  2. Section 11 appeal was dismissed, HR complaint continues
  3. Timeliness application
  4. Ministry of Education dismissed

Respondents Defence Strategy

[10] The School District says that in April 2019, it decided to place the Student on a partial day program pursuant to the Ministry’s Special Needs Students Order, M150/89 [ Ministerial Order ], which states:……

(This policy is used as the school district’s defence to the exclusion in this case.)

[12] In or around 2019, the Student was diagnosed with Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder-Combined [ ADHD-C ], anxiety, and Oppositional Defiant Disorder [ ODD ].

[13] The School District says the Ministerial Order clearly applied in the Student’s circumstances. It says that shortly after the Student started kindergarten, her teacher raised concerns regarding some of the Student’s behaviours related to self-regulation and ability to follow expectations in the classroom, which indicated a need for extra support. The School District says these behaviours escalated during the period of January to March 2019, and included task avoidance, touching others, eloping from the classroom, disrupting the class environment, being unable to follow simple adult directions, and running through the school. In response, the School District says it began implementing more interventions and support for the Student. However, despite these additional supports, the School District says the Student’s behaviour continued to escalate to the point that neither her educational needs, nor those of her classmates, were being met.

The parent made a section 11 appeal

18] The parties agree that the Parent went through the following steps of the appeal procedure:

a. Step 1: appeal to the school principal who upheld the decision to place the Student on a partial day program.

b. Step 2: appeal to the Assistant Superintendent, Learning Services for the School District, who upheld the school principal’s decision.

c. Step 3: appeal to the Superintendent of Schools, who upheld the Assistant Superintendent’s decision.

d. Step 4: appeal to the Board of Trustees for the School District. The Board issued its decision on November 28, 2019, stating that they did not deem it appropriate to require that the Student be immediately returned to full-time attendance at school.

This is SUPER important – take a look at the reason for the appeal not being upheld

[20] The Superintendent of Appeals summarily dismissed the appeal concerning s. 2(2)(f), and an adjudicator rendered a decision dismissing the appeal under s. 2(2)(b) finding that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the Student had not been suspended from school [ Ministry Appeal Decision ].

Because the student hadn’t been suspended!!

They do this a lot!

This is VERY important learning for us.

Ministry of Education – Dismissed

So the parent filed against the Ministry of Education as well. They were dismissed from the case. No surprises here. We have seen this over and over.

[31] The Ministry says there has been a clear legislative choice, as set out in the School Act , to divide the roles and responsibilities for K-12 education in BC between the Ministry and the School District. The services the complaint claims the Ministry ought to have provided have not been delineated as within the scope of the Ministry’s jurisdiction and/or authority and would involve an inappropriate intrusion into the role and responsibilities of the School District.

[32] Further, the Ministry says there is no evidence that it had any involvement in the decisions or actions related to the Student’s educational program. The Ministry provides funding and oversight at a high level with respect to K-12 education.

Ministerial Order does not excuse them from human rights process

Now this is SUPER INTERESTING!

[38] The School District argues that the allegations in the complaint fall outside the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. Specifically, the School District says the complainant is improperly attempting to challenge the validity if the Ministerial Order through the Tribunal’s process. The School District notes that one of the remedies sought in the complaint is “changes made to the School Act to protect children who have special needs,” which is beyond the Tribunal’s authority. The School District says it has the legal authority to put students on a partial day program pursuant to the Ministerial Order, under section 75 and 168(2)(t) of the School Act . In this case, the School District says that the Student demonstrated behaviour which met the criteria for a partial day program as set out in the Ministerial Order.

[39] I agree with the School District that the Tribunal does not have the authority to overturn the Ministerial Order or to find the Ministerial Order itself invalid. Similarly, the Tribunal cannot order that changes be made to the School Act . However, I am not persuaded that the allegations in the current complaint are outside of the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.

See what I mean by the respondents will always have an argument.

The stuff they come up with is fascinating.

I gotta hand it to them, they are creative.

The tribunal’s response was this:

[40] Although reforms to the School Act are raised in the complaint as a potential remedy, I read the allegations as encompassing concerns about the manner in which the Ministerial Orders were applied in these circumstances, and the impact on the Student as an Indigenous child with disabilities, rather than the validity of the Ministerial Orders themselves. This is not a complaint challenging the non-discretionary application of legislative criteria, for example. The determination of the “educational needs” of a student with special needs or other students, as well as the appropriate alternative programming for a child with special needs, per the Ministerial Order, are discretionary decisions made by teachers or other School District personnel. These decisions, if influenced by the protected characteristics of an affected student, are within the Tribunal’s jurisdiction to review.

[43] I do not agree with the School District’s characterization of this issue as one of jurisdiction. Rather, it is part of the human rights analysis the Tribunal must undertake in any case and would more appropriately be raised under s.27(1)(b) or (c) of the Code . Nevertheless, I consider whether the allegations against the School District raise an arguable contravention of the Code under s. 27(1)(g) analysis below.

[44] Accordingly, I deny the School District’s application under s. 27(1)(a) of the Code .

Woohoo!

Now, another benefit of this decision is that the respondents know that this argument wont fly with the tribunal. So, this case helps to whittle down their arguments. That is very good.

AND if this wasn’t interesting enough, we even get a timeliness application.

Timeliness Application

[50] I am satisfied in the current circumstances that the allegations form a continuing contravention, and the most recent act of alleged discrimination occurred within one year of the filing of the complaint. I am further satisfied that the allegations pass the “arguable contravention test.”

What is a continuing convention of the code?

[47] A complaint is filed in time if the last allegation of discrimination happened within one year, and older allegations are part of a “continuing contravention”: Code , s. 22(2); School District v. Parent obo the Child , 2018 BCCA 136  at para. 68  . A continuing contravention is “a succession or repetition of separate acts of discrimination of the same character” that could be considered separate contraventions of the Code , and “not merely one act of discrimination which may have continuing effects or consequences”: Chen v. Surrey (City), 2015 BCCA 57 at para. 23  ; School District at para. 50  .

Here are some important allegations that give us a peek into what the parent was dealing with. Always know with these decisions, we aren’t getting the full picture. Decisions are written up to only include the information that is needed for the decision. There is ALWAYS more to the story.

a. February 1, 2019: The Student was put on partial days of school and was not allowed to participate in school activities or be in attendance with her peers;

b. March 1, 2019: The previous vice principal said: “it just gets to a point in the day where we just don’t want to deal with [the Student] anymore”;

c. April 1, 2019: The Parent was called to the school to pick up the Student because “she was having trauma triggered behaviours and several school staff including the principal, vice principal, and EAs had her cornered in the classroom and she was scared, trapped, and in distress;

d. June 1, 2019: The principal said to the Parent: “have you thought about transferring her to a different school?”;

e. June 1, 2019: The Student was separated from her class and was not allowed to be in a classroom with other children;

f. August 1, 2019: The previous Assistant Superintendent said school staff do not want to work with the Student because she is a “dirty girl”;

g. September 1, 2019: “Step 1” meeting with the principal to appeal the decision not to allow the Student in school full time – denied;

h. September 1, 2019: “Step 2” meeting with the Assistant Superintendent to appeal the decision not to allow the Student in school full time – denied;

i. November 1, 2019: “Step 3” meeting with Superintendent of Schools to appeal the decision not to allow the Student in school full time – denied;

j. November 26, 2019: “Step 4” meeting with Board of Trustees to appeal the decision not to allow the Student in school full time – denied.

In conclusion – public interest too!

[66] For these reasons, I find that the complaint is timely. Had I reached a different conclusion, I would have still found that the public interest favours accepting this complaint. The education system has been identified as a common area of human rights concern for Indigenous children: BC Human Rights Tribunal, (2020) “Expanding Our Vision: Cultural Equality and Indigenous Peoples’ Human Rights” at p. 27; Ontario Human Rights Commission, (2018) “To dream together: Indigenous peoples and human rights dialogue report” at p. 40. Courts and Tribunals have taken notice that Indigenous women and girls have been, and continue to be, particularly subject to hurtful biases, stereotypes and assumptions, including that they are “unintelligent” or “people of low or bad character not deserving of the same respect, humanity and dignity as others”: R. v Zakuti , 2021 BCSC 2253 at para. 25; Lindsay v. Toronto District School Board , 2020 HRTO 496 at para. 23. Here, the Student as an Indigenous girl who has been denied full access to the public education system, requires that this complaint be situated in its full socio-historical context. The Code ’s purpose of identifying and eliminating persistent patterns of inequality associated with discrimination protected by the Code is served by this complaint being heard at a hearing on the merits: s. 3(d).

And here is this beautiful statement

Dismissal denied – Complaint Proceeding

[68] I deny the application to dismiss the complaint against the School District. These allegations will proceed to a hearing.

I really encourage you to read the case in full. There are a lot of interesting details in there.

Due to the parent’s persistence in bringing this case forward, we have some very interesting legal analysis that are advancing the human rights code. This decision is now an advocacy tool and we are learning about what we need to do.  The piece about appeals being denied around suspensions is very interesting to have this documented.

It would be interesting to see a section 11 appeal done if the school refuses to log it as a suspension. Topics to discuss amongst education advocates, the importance of exclusion being labelled a suspension.

A big thank you to this parent’s advocacy.

“It doesn’t make a difference”

Yes, it does!

That sentence literally makes me want to rip my face off. My body actually physically responds first, when I hear that from people. It’s like a wave that just rushes over my body. And I have to sit still for just a minute, so I don’t lose my shit.

….okay I am actually going to sit in this and lose my shit for a bit.

Yes. It. Does. Make. A. Difference.

Many people have the expectation that one big thing needs to happen and then the education system is suddenly going to change overnight.

That is impossible.

I can tell you right now, it is never going to happen.

(When systems are forced to change overnight, it doesn’t tend to be by choice or for the better)

Social movements that change the hearts and minds of people are slow and painful, and laborious work. Anti-ableism work is slow and painful and laborious work.

It requires a bunch of little things, moderate things, quiet work, and loud work all mixed up together by multiple groups of people over and over again. Everything adds up. You won’t see it all. You won’t know all the players on all of the teams. You won’t understand it all. There will be many side conversations, many unknown emails, many people working in the shadows and many people working in the spotlight.

Saying, “what is the point, it’s not going to do anything anyways”

Sorry, but YOU have missed the point.

When I hear that, what you have taught me is that you don’t understand how systems work. What breaks me, is that by people making those comments, you are undermining other people’s efforts. Please, please, please, keep your comments to yourself.

We need to lift people up and cheer them on. Not the opposite. Change is never a simple, clear line from A to B. It’s two steps forward, one step back. It’s messy, it’s confusing, it’s uncomfortable, and it’s all over the place. Because we are always stepping into uncharted territory. When people push the line, they don’t know what is going to happen. How people are going to react, because in this space and time, it’s never been done before. People are inspired and moved, and it changes people’s thinking, watching other people step into advocacy. It shows people what is possible, or what won’t work, and where we need to go next. It’s all valuable.

Please stop telling people to give up, why bother and what’s the point.

Lots of people are not giving up. Lots of people want to be a bother. And lots of people have a lot of points.

So to all of the people out there who are doing the quiet work, the moderate work, and the loud work, I encourage you to take your points and be pointy.

Everything adds up. The stepping stones all become useful for different things at various times. You will never really know all the ways that impact the system. None of it is a waste.

Society thanks you.

Understanding Systemic Change

Rant over.

Petition – To Premier Eby – Invest in Schools Now

(ID: text: Storm Warning: BC Public Education Crisis Rally BC Families for Public Education. Picture of dark clouds over a school building with the outline of children and adults holding hands in front of the school. Lighting coming from the clouds down to the people)

Sign the Petition

https://chng.it/b7NDsP8rXn

News Articles

Surrey students plan march to push for B.C. school funding

Students rally against closure of White Rock learning centre

Kamloops-Thompson DPAC holding rally to push for more school district funding

Surrey parents and students rally for education funding

Students, parents protest Surrey school district’s band class cuts

Students rally to save South Surrey White Rock Learning Centre – You Tube

Vancouver School Board trustee faces backlash after post referring to parents concerns as ‘spam’

The government is under budget constraints?? Doesn’t add up.

“According to that 2021 data, BC allocates just 3 percent of its GPP to K-12 education, while Manitoba allocates 4.9 percent, Nova Scotia 4.4 percent, Saskatchewan and Prince Edward Island 4.2 percent, Quebec 4.1 percent, New Brunswick 4 percent, Ontario 3.8 percent and Alberta 3.3 percent. This smaller percentage means BC school boards have less funding available for student support and to provide up-to-date, adequate and safe school buildings.”

https://www.policyalternatives.ca/news-research/increased-public-funding-for-private-schools-is-dividing-us-and-needs-to-stop/

Our province is the LOWEST.

How are other provinces able to fund schools more than BC? PEI is at 4. 2% and BC is just 3%.

Explain that!

The kids who are going to feel the effects of the budget constraints the most are the most vulnerable kids.

I do not understand how the people in government, who are making these budget decisions, sleep at night.

Please sign the petition! A HUGE thank you to the organizers. Let’s spread this far and wide!

Parents are not going to sit back and tolerate this.

We are voters!!

Well, a message to the other government parties. You want to kick these people out? Make funding public schools your election commitment. Be nervous NDP! Want to keep your seats? FUND SCHOOLS!!

The Flaw of Inclusion

There is one part of “inclusion” that worries me.

You can be in a room with 100 people and feel utterly alone.

Depending on the type of disability you have, you may not meet someone with the same disability as you until you are an adult.

Just because you are in the same room with a bunch of people, doesn’t mean you feel like you belong there. That you are accepted. Hell…it doesn’t even mean you’ll be tolerated.

Growing up with other people who don’t have anything in common with you, at the core, and experience life differently… is bizarre. It’s like watching a movie.

People with rare diseases will travel halfway around the world just to be in the same space as someone else so they can talk about everything they are experiencing and have someone say the words “me too!”.

There is a reason humans have such a strong desire to be around other people who mirror similar elements to themselves. We feel seen. Understood. Real.

Inclusion as a concept is great. Fully support it.

However….

This is one flaw that I really don’t like.

The one good thing about grouping people with similar characteristics together is that they get to meet other people just like them, and those friendships and bonds are stronger than anything else.

Kids in gifted programs will report that they finally meet other kids who are just like them, and they feel “normal” for the first time. Educate Deaf children together and we have the learning of American Sign Language, Deaf culture and a community. At stuttering conferences, many report that meeting other people who stutter is soul-saving.

Inclusion spreads people out, and those bonds are not connecting. Under the concept of inclusion, how are we going to meet each other?

If you are neurodivergent, ask yourself… how many of your friends are also neurodivergent?

I can tell you, I already know the answer. Your closest friends, you will say, all of them are neurodivergent. And I bet you, as an adult, meeting other people just like you and talking about your experiences has been part of your healing process and becoming comfortable in your skin.

If kids are spread out like a dropped clump of marbles in the education system, rolling out in all directions, how are they going to meet and have friendships with other kids that they can see themselves in? They won’t.

That makes my heart sink.

So, how can we have both?

How can we connect kids with each other and still give them an inclusive education?

CLUBS!?

What else can we do?

Some districts are closing their gifted programs. Are there other ways we can bring gifted kids together?

We need to figure out something. People with disabilities shouldn’t have to wait until they are adults to meet other people who are just like them. That is incredibly isolating.

The first time I met someone who stuttered, I realized we had more in common than the friends I grew up with. And my friends were the same gender as me, the same age, had the same teachers, grew up in the same neighbourhood. Yet, this person who I just met 5 min ago who stuttered, who was not my gender, not in my generation, from another country, we could say “me too” for the first time.

People who don’t have disabilities or who are neurotypical don’t realize this part. Just how important it is. You all get to see yourselves in another human being every time you leave your home and enter society.

A lot of us connect over the internet, Zoom into support groups, and gather at conferences.

In order for inclusion not to have its dark side, we need to figure out how to still connect kids and not just have them all spread out like a dropped clump of marbles.

Facebook Post – On BCEdAccess Blog

Hello Everyone,

It’s time to get loud.

I have a volunteer role outside of my Speaking UP BC blogging and PATH. I am the Chair of BCEdAccess Society. I have been a part of the Facebook group for years. I am sharing a blog I wrote through my role and volunteer work with BCEdAccess. This is the first time I am sharing a blog through my own personal Facebook page. I hummed and hawed over whether this was a good idea or not. To blend the two of them. But I have decided to do it anyways, as the content of the blog, I really want to share.

The purpose of sharing this blog as much as I can is to provide a seed of thought and spark a conversation. A questioning and analysis of how this education system is functioning. Seeing whether you agree with what I wrote or not, is not my purpose. Whatever your view is on the funding issues our school districts are facing, please find people in your life and start a conversation about your thoughts. I’d love it even more if one of those people were your local MLA.

I haven’t really talked about it publicly but I was an EA in the school system for years. I did my training and student placements in hearing and Deaf schools in Ontario, worked in Montreal, and then again here in BC. I know what working education is really like. So, I see the education system from a staffs perspective and I understand it from a parents perspective. I have friends who are teachers and EAs. When I was working in schools and had discussions with staff, there were things that were happening and we wanted to speak out about it and talk to parents. We were crossing our fingers that parents were going to rally together and fight the school. Teachers and EAs cannot speak out about their working conditions publicly or even students learning conditions. The closest they come to being able to do that is when they are on strike. Other than that, they are forced to keep quiet or they will lose their jobs. Even then, there was a legal decision centred around teachers posting flyers educating parents about the educational losses that were happening. Teachers were identifying the harms that the cuts would have on student learning with the statements “Our Children’s Education is Threatened” and this went to a hearing to analyze their freedom of expression issues. Their employers wanted them to shut up. I will link the case below.

People who work in the education system need to be very careful what they say publicly. Even what kind of content they “like” on social media. There is even policy behind this. So on social media, teachers and EAs need to be silent or risk their employment. We are dealing with educators leaving their jobs at exceptionally high numbers. Districts are reporting issues with high absenteeism. Districts are so desperate for adults they are hiring people who have not been trained as teachers or EAs.

The blog from BCEdAccess was posted yesterday, on a holiday, when many people would have plans or be enjoying the long weekend. In less than 12 hours, this blog became the second most viewed blog on our website, close to reaching the numbers of our most viewed blog which took days to reach that number of views. On my personal Speaking Up BC my stats jumped to numbers as if I had posted the blog on my own site. The number of new viewers skyrocketed and what people were mostly viewing was my blog “Why can’t we just sue the government?”, which I will link below.

A lot of stuff is shared in secret. People are sharing my blog amongst their colleagues, friends and family and they are just not sharing this publicly. I want parents to know, that just because you don’t see school staff or trustees in the media ripping the government to pieces doesn’t mean they aren’t advocating behind closed doors. They may have duct tape over their mouths publicly, but I don’t.

We all want a better education system. Budget cuts and the chronic underfunding impacts every single person and worst of all, it impacts our children, which builds the foundation for the rest of their life.

I don’t need people to comment publicly on my work. The feedback I get on whether I have planted a seed of thought, I get through website statistics. I know the ones that have stirred conversation. This blog is one of them. And the work week hasn’t even started yet.

However you view and feel the impacts of the chronic underfunding and the cuts that are coming this year, please talk about it with other people. And if one of them is your MLA, thank you!

Here is the blog posted on the BCEdAccess website

https://bcedaccess.com/…/scarcity-in-education-harmful…

Here is the hearing decision BCTF and the BC Public School Employers

https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcla/doc/2004/2004canlii94306/2004canlii94306.html

Here are my blogs

Why Can’t we Just Sue the Government

&

Budget time

Another new HR decision – Intersecting Identity – Self-Representing Parent – A win!

I have written so many posts that start with New HR decision that it’s starting to sound ridiculous.

So, yes this is another new one. I know we just had a new one a couple of days ago.

I can’t tell you how exciting this is. This is the month of April, only four months into 2025 and we are already at 5 decisions with more to come. This is going to be quite the year!!

Is the Ministry of Education and Child Care paying attention to all of this????

They better wake up!

Here we go.

Decision #5 – This parent is self-representing. They won. The complaint is fully proceeding.

Child (by the Parent) v. School District, 2025 BCHRT 89

This case involves a couple of protected grounds.

[3] The Child identifies as Black and of African race, ancestry and place of origin. The Child has a mild Autism Spectrum Disorder [ ASD ], which the Parent describes as largely diagnosed from his late speech and asymptomatic.

This is a timeliness complaint

What is interesting about this case from an analysis point of view is that there were gaps between the discrimination and multiple allegations were beyond the one-year time limit, and yet it was still accepted.

[25] Having found multiple arguable contraventions of the Code , that are both timely and out of time, it is necessary to next consider whether the late-filed allegations form part of a continuing contravention.

[26] I first considered whether the allegations are of a similar character for the purposes of determining the existence of a continuing contravention of the Code . The School District argues the timely allegations are dissimilar because the timely allegations involve different children at different schools. I disagree with the School District. From my review of the allegations in their entirety, I agree with the Child that they involve the School District’s failure to properly respond in series of altercations where white male students harmed the Child for reasons related to his race, colour, ancestry, place of origin and mental disability. At the same time, the allegations are of a similar character because the Child alleges the School District’s repeated responses to all these incidents were unfair to him for reasons related to the personal characteristics identified. In my view, the similar character of these allegations is not affected in any material way because they occurred at different schools and with different white male children.

[27] I have next considered the existence of gaps between allegations. I have determined that there are no significant gaps for the purposes of s. 22(2) of the Code in this case. I disagree with the School District’s approach to this question by looking at the entire timespan for the allegations in question. In my view, it is more appropriate to look at the length of time between allegations to determine whether they occurred in succession. Here, there were gaps of half of year to about nine months between most of the allegations and these are explained by the somewhat randomness of serious incidents happening when the white male students engaged the Child. The only possibly significant gap in my view, occurred between the November 2019 incident and the Spring 2021 incident. However, this gap is easily explained by the fact that during most of 2020 schools were closed due to pandemic restrictions and the Child was not in physical proximity to the students in question.

[28] Overall, I am satisfied the Child’s allegations from the June 2018 incident to the Spring 2021 incident allegations are of a similar nature in succession to the timely October 2021 incidents allegations. As such, the Complaint is a timely continuing contravention of the Code and it is, therefore, unnecessary for me to determine whether it is in the public interest to allow any late filed allegations to proceed.

There are multiple allegations of bullying connected to racism and what I would label as ableism.

Here is an example.

[13] On October 20, 2021, the Child alleges three higher grade white boys followed him into the bathroom and one of the boys intentionally slammed a bathroom stall door into his face. The Child alleges this incident resulted in him chipping his two front teeth. He alleges the School District principal and vice principal were unmoved by the incident and did not want to report it to the police. The Child alleges the vice principal kept blaming him for screaming and shouting and rolling around on the floor as an attempt to magnify his autism behaviour to justify the other boys’ wrongdoing. Once again, the Child alleges the School District protected the white assailants from receiving any blame for the incident. This allegedly included the School District saying that they did not know which boy had caused the harm to the Child. The Child alleges this incident was a good example of the School District’s staff demonstrating their inclination to favour white children in altercations involving him [the October 20, 2021, incident ]

I encourage everyone to read this case in full.

The other human rights case that was connected to discriminatory bullying is this one. I’ll be adding this case now to that page as well.

Way to go, self-represented parent!

Communicating with the School – Friend or Foe?

This can be tricky.

There are certain levels of advocacy. We always tend to start off slow and see how things unfold. Sometimes things resolve organically or with minimal intervention. Other times, things can turn adversarial. Building relationships with people has been an important element to advocating and building community in general. Pulling people in, instead of pushing them away. 

However…. there will be times when major incidents can flip things upside down. Or, enough moderate levels of chronic discrimination make maintaining or building that relationship very difficult. 

If you are reading my blog, you have probably found me through a Google search or Facebook. Chances are, you have found me because things are not going well. You may already be in the process of an external complaint system or are seriously considering it. 

Communication when things get intense in schools is a different world. 

Sometimes, school staff will recognize right away that the subject you want to discuss could potentially place them in hot water. They will call you instead of sending you an email.

Or sometimes it’s the opposite. They will send you a triggering email on purpose. Poking you intentionally. Wanting your elevated response to be documented.   

Not all of their communication will be adversarial. Sometimes they are genuinely looking to resolve the situation and don’t want to escalate things further and so they want to meet with you in person. Sometimes we are so triggered by past negative experiences with school staff that we are automatically launched into defence or attack mode. We end up making the worst assumptions out of fear responses, from very lovely people. And I speak from experience.

On the other hand, we may truly be dealing with strategic “wolves in sheep clothing” type people.  And I also speak from experience. It can be hard to weed through and figure out who wants to help and who is following instructions from the legal team. Friend or foe?

I saw a t-shirt online once and it read “Mr. Rogers didn’t prepare me for the people in my neighbourhood.” I laughed because that resonated!

When navigating the education system, there are rules on the order of who you can communicate with and how you can communicate with them.

Here are some examples of types of communication experiences:

  1. They may tell you are not allowed to communicate with your child’s EA. (Which is true. All communication needs to go through the teacher. Some schools are more flexible about this.)
  2. You need to first talk to your child’s teacher before you contact ______. (They have a strict hierarchy of who you talk to first and how to escalate. They also have internal rules on who the district can talk to and they need to follow an order. Be aware that if you email the district about your child’s principal, that principal will be contacted to get their side of the story, before they contact you.)
  3. They may just ignore your email.
  4. They may call you after you have sent an email instead of responding in writing. 
  5. They may request a meeting.
  6. They may flat out lie to you.
  7. They may gaslight you.
  8. They may minimize the issues.
  9. They may blame your child for not self-advocating.
  10. They may distract you with irrelevant information about other topics.
  11. They may send someone to befriend you to gather information.
  12. They may want to de-escalate this as quickly as possible hoping the issues don’t blow up into bigger ones. (These are the trauma-informed responses. These are the ones we hope for.)

For people who are in independent schools, you need to be extra careful. Many parents sign code of conduct agreements and if you cross the line they can kick out your kid and blame it on you for breaking the contract. Some will even have in their written contract that you file an external complaint, that is reason to kick out your kid.

It’s easier to see some of the games they play in hindsight. It’s harder to recognize this stuff when you are in it and your emotions are high, and possibly feel like you are in survival mode for your child.  It can be hard to trust our own judgement. Sometimes we read into things too deeply thinking we are under attack, when we are not. Sometimes we are, and our gut instincts are spot on.

There is a big difference when you are just advocating internally vs. you are costing the districts thousands of dollars in legal fees or taking up a lot of time of senior administration. It’s just good to keep our eyes wide open and reflect and pay attention to HOW they are communicating. It can be very revealing. It’s not just what they are saying and what they are doing. It’s also what they are NOT saying and what they are NOT doing that can also be revealing. 

Also know, lawyers are involved way earlier than we think they are.

They may tell us that what we are doing is “inappropriate”. They may use silence. All of these are flags that we are onto something and have hit a nerve. I offer you all this blog. 5 rules on how to stay untouchable.

Having someone join you in a meeting to take notes can be very helpful. I have left meetings and wondered what on earth has just happened here. They can spin you in circles. It can be a good thing to have a support person and a witness. You will need to bring someone who isn’t a parent in the school district. Otherwise, they will claim confidentiality reasons that they can not attend.

When you email someone, and if you cc: people, those in the cc: line will not respond. If you want a response from someone, you need to stick them in the TO: line.

A great resource to find out who you need to talk to internally, the hierarchy, is in Chapter 7 of the Inclusion BC, Inclusive Education Manual.

I also recommend that you look on your school district’s website. They will likely have a parent’s code of conduct document, and/or a document on how to resolve conflict. You will need to follow that step by step.

Solution Options:

  1. If they only want to talk on the phone, you can follow up with an email of what was discussed and ask them to clarify if you misunderstood anything.
  2. For dealing with silence I offer you this page.
  3. Some parents have resorted to recording phone conversations. There are laws around recording conversations. You will need to research this and stay up to date on any law changes. If they tell you in a meeting that they don’t want to be recorded, you will not be able to record them. If you are an employee wanting to record conversations at work, you are in a whole other area of law that is specific to employment and I HIGHLY recommend you consult with an employment lawyer before you go down this path.
  4. Bring a note-taker or support person with you to meetings.
  5. If you are making allegations against a staff member that they did something, be aware that they have every right to explain, clarify and defend themselves. They will be included in the resolution process. In all formal working structures that I am aware of, each complaint system wants you to try to resolve the issue with the person first. 
  6. If internal advocacy through the whole internal process (all the way to the top) doesn’t resolve anything, external options may be your only recourse.

For big incidents, parents/guardians are often looking for an apology. Some get it, some don’t. I wouldn’t hold your breath waiting for one. They are often advised by their lawyers never to admit to anything. Something else I saw online, “I hope you heal from the things no one apologized for”. The need for accountability can drive people through the external complaint systems. Which I don’t think is a bad thing. Filing complaints is a form of advocacy. Our experiences are included in data collection and this can lead to systemic change. School districts need to know they have external eyes on them. Letting them think they are untouchable is dangerous in my eyes.

Communication is the foundation of advocacy.

If this is an area that you need support with, I really encourage you to find an advocacy buddy, support group, request accommodations with the district if this is disability related, and/or connect with other support professionals who can help you navigate. There are non-profits offering this kind of support, but also people who do this kind of work full-time.

The Next Generation of Student Advocates

In the last year or so, we’ve had an increase in student advocacy throughout the BC Human Rights Tribunal Process. These students are doing things that not all adults can even bring themselves to do. Here is some hope for the future.

All of these advocates want to make some noise about their experiences. I encourage you to read their complaints in full. All four were able to experience different layers of success with their decisions.

Let’s take a look!!

Advocate #1

Vick v. Board of Education of School District No. 41 (Burnaby), 2024 BCHRT 104

[4] Ms. Vick alleges having a learning disability and other mental disabilities. She is a former student at the School District. Ms. Vick was a minor during the period when the allegations in question occurred and at the time she filed this complaint.

[5]               Ms. Vick alleges generally that multiple teachers at the School District were hostile towards her for being unable to complete course work on time because of her learning disabilities and mental illnesses. She says this occurred despite the teachers knowing about her disabilities.

[15]           In the August 8, 2022, complaint amendment, Ms. Vick confirmed she wanted to name the School District as the respondent in the April 6, 2022, complaint

33]           Ms. Vick is seeking justice for the School District’s alleged failure to accommodate her mental disabilities. She believes her case is unique and novel in that it involves a School District service provider failing to properly accommodate her disabilities.

[31] ….Ms. Vick demonstrated her maturity regarding the existence of the Code and the Tribunal process when she filed her first complaint with the Tribunal in September 2021 and this complaint on April 6, 2022, while still a minor on both occasions.

Two complaints she has filed. Good for her. As a way to enhance her justice seeking, here is a list of her allegations against the Burnaby School District from her complaint filed in 2022.

[7]               On January 1, 2018, Ms. Vick alleges a teacher sent a rude email to her mother in response to her mother’s request that Ms. Vick be accommodated for her disabilities [the January 1, 2018, Allegation].

[8]               On July 1, 2019, Ms. Vick alleges a summer schoolteacher refused to provider her with any accommodations while her support teacher was on a break. She says the teacher also stood beside her desk, pressuring her to finish a test [the July 1, 2019, Allegation]

[9]               On November 1, 2019, Ms. Vick alleges that she asked a teacher for an extension of time to finish an assignment, but permission was not granted until her support teacher later asked on her behalf. Later the same day, Mr. Vick alleges she was told to leave the class during a manic episode, despite not acting aggressively [the November 1, 2019, Allegation No. 1]

[10]           On November 1, 2019, Ms. Vick alleges a teacher made fun of one of her disabilities by asking if she was manic in a joking and sarcastic way [the November 1, 2019, Allegation No. 2]

[11]           On June 1, 2021, Ms. Vick alleges a teacher who was aware of her disabilities acted in a hostile manner when she was unable to finish her homework on time following a “mixed episode”. Ms. Vick says the teacher later told her in an email that it was not discrimination to refuse an accommodation. Finally, Ms. Vick alleges the teacher later dismissed the class 40 minutes early preventing her from doing a mandatory presentation, which resulted in her failing the class [the June 1, 2021, Allegation].

[12]           On September 9, 2021, Ms. Vick filed a complaint against the Ministry of Education alleging it neglected to make reasonable adjustments in how it provided education to those with mental illnesses, including herself, which would reduce the negative effects of mental illness on education outcomes. Ms. Vick alleges teachers’ lack the training related to teaching students with mental disabilities. She also alleges teachers failed to identify children with disabilities needing to be referred for an assessment of their diagnosis. Finally, teachers failed children with mental disabilities as they did not know the options for accommodating their disabilities.

Advocate #2

Child K (by Ehmke) and another v. Queen of All Saints School and another

Here are the allegations:

(37) Child K has a chronic health condition which impacts her ability to do certain tasks in a classroom, including writing. Mrs. Ehmke alleges that, throughout grade 2, her teacher failed to provide necessary classroom accommodations to meet Child K’s disability-related needs. She says that she asked the School to provide Child K with an Individualized Education Plan [IEP], but the School took the position that Child K was not entitled to one because her needs were being met through classroom adaptations. Towards the end of the school year, Mrs. Ehmke asked the School to apply for a Ministry of Education funding designation for Child K. The School declined to pursue a designation at that time. It said that it would address the issue in the fall of 2018, when the applications to the Ministry were due.

(38) Mrs. Ehmke says that, throughout the year, Child K’s school-related anxiety was escalating because her disability-related needs were not being met. On April 24, 2018, Child K stopped attending School because of that anxiety. She never returned. The following year, Child K enrolled in a public school, where she received a Ministry designation and an IEP.

This was an anonymization decision. The child and the parent were fighting to be named and name the school. The tribunal took caution and decided to name the parent and the school, and said that when she is an adult she can decide if she wants to change her name on this decision. It is noted in the decision,

[11]           In consenting to anonymize and limit publication of Child K’s name, Mrs. Ehmke is clear that her purpose is to preserve Child K’s right to choose, when she is old enough, whether to make her identity in this complaint process public to people outside their school and faith communities. Mrs. Ehmke describes Child K as a person who is “activist-minded” and is used to advocating for herself in connection with her disabilities. She says that it is not helpful for Child K to keep her disabilities invisible, and that most people within their school and faith communities are already aware of the circumstances giving rise to this complaint. These submissions are important to understand Mrs. Ehmke’s position about whether to extend anonymization orders and publication bans to other people involved in the complaint.

[12]           I anonymize and order a ban on publication of Child K’s name in connection with this complaint, unless or until Child K identifies herself as a party to this complaint after she is 19 years old, in which case the publication ban will cease.

It takes a lot of bravery to break through the stigma attached to anxiety and be a role model to others. Both child and Mom have paved a path by this decision.

Advocate #3

Student (by Parent) v. School District, 2023 BCHRT 237

[2]               I commend the Student for her participation in this difficult process. She gave evidence that was helpful, straightforward, and credible, and which I have relied on to decide this case. I also thank the Parent and representatives of the District for their hard work and sensitivity in presenting their respective cases.

[114]      Finally – a note for the Student. It was apparent to me in this hearing that there are many caring adults invested in the Student’s wellbeing and development. She is an impressive young person with a sophisticated understanding of herself and her needs, and a Parent who is proactively equipping her with the tools she will need to continue her success into adulthood. I congratulate her on all that she has achieved, and wish her the best with what is to come.

Testifying can be intimidating and stressful for adults. She chose to speak up and talk about her experience. By doing so, this decision was written. This decision brought meaningful inquiry into the duty to accommodate and other advancements in The Code.

Advocate #4

Bigam by MacDonald v. Board of Education of School District No. 23 (Central Okanagan) and others, 2024 BCHRT 288

Given that the tribunal is always overly cautious about protecting the identity of minors, I assume that the teenager wanted to be named.

If that is true then ALL 3 advocates wanted to be named in their complaints.

Here are the allegations made by Advocate #3.

[1]               Faith Bigam, who has been diagnosed with multiple sclerosis [MS], was in Grade 11 when a teacher allegedly prevented her from presenting during a school assembly at which she had been slated to speak [assembly incident]. In her complaint, she alleges that the teacher (Kathryn Lafontaine), the school principal (Kathy Weninger), and the school district discriminated against her based on mental and physical disability in the area of services contrary to s. 8 of the Human Rights Code by preventing her from speaking and by mishandling the assembly incident after it occurred. She says that because of these events, she was unable to return to school and ultimately lost out on important social and educational opportunities.

[7]               According to Ms. Bigam, she was concerned that she would be bullied at George Elliot should the students there find out that she had MS. Ms. Bigam says that in Grade 11 she missed a lot of school due to health issues, which made it difficult to maintain her friendships. She says that she found it anxiety provoking to go to school. Despite these concerns, however, and with the encouragement of one of her teachers, Leslie Plummer, Ms. Bigam decided in early March 2019 to talk to the school about MS and living with MS. Ms. Bigam says: “I finally realized that it was important to me to talk about MS and to spread awareness about it in a positive way at school…” Ms. Bigam “thought it would be beneficial to the school, and to me and others like me.”

Another child and parent paving the path by exposing their complaint to the public.

**********

Learning to advocate for yourself and feeling the confidence and bravery to stand up for yourself does not come easy. Especially when you grow up in an ableist society and you are given these micro messages all day long that your rights are less than.

I can’t say how impressed I am that these four are speaking up for themselves and using their experience as examples for others to learn from and advance the human rights code. Just by having these decisions published for the public to witness and learn from is worthy advocacy. An interesting trend, they are determined to name themselves and the school districts. Is that due to anger? Justice seeking? There is so much stigma about mental health and disability and these four are pushing the boundaries on what can be talked about and not remain hidden. I wish all four of these students all the best and many many many thanks!

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





“It depends…”

People want to know what navigating the human rights tribunal system is going to be like for them. If it is going to be a lot work, or how many hours they will they need to have available for them to do it.

It all depends.

It depends on what your goals are.

Do you want a settlement for your child with specific remedies for them? For example, more EA support, a new school district policy, and/or settlement money. Currently, with the complaint process, the settlement meeting option is coming before anything else. Document disclosure, applications, case conferences, etc. Those all come after if the settlement meeting didn’t bring the parties together on an agreement.

If you want to take your case to a hearing, now we are talking about a whole other level. You are going to need to self-educate yourself more.

Everyone’s experience isn’t exactly the same and their cases aren’t exactly the same. Some parents are absolutely LIVID and that anger propels them forward into action. Some people are sad about how everything has unfolded, and they just want this to be over and move on. Some people need certain things to happen in order for them to move on. I find it also depends if you are in a public school or a private school. If you have a lawyer or if you are self-representing. It depends if your child is still in the school or if you have already pulled them out. It also depends very much on the complexity of your case, and how much learning you are going to need to do. Some people fear retaliation, while others see this process as protecting their child from retaliation. It also depends on who you are as a person and how much experience you have navigating systems. Some people have already been self-representing themselves in family court and so they already know how to regulate their emotions and go through the system. Their confidence levels are higher. Some people have support systems and are already part of advocacy groups, and/or they have other forms of emotional support in place. It all depends on so many factors. Some people navigating the tribunal system have had experiences of closure and peace, feeling heard. Others have felt it didn’t bring what they were looking for and it was a waste of time. For some people it feels like a big deal to file a human rights complaint, other people don’t think anything of it, just do it, and carry on in their day. It all depends.

There are a few common themes in people who file human rights complaints, that I have seen so far.

  1. They want change. They never want another child to experience what their child did. They want to change the education system.
  2. They want accountability. Having these people get away with what they did, they cannot accept. Part of this, I have noticed, is that people fear that they will just keep doing what they are doing and so this does come back to point #1, and not wanting another child to have the same experience.
  3. They want to be seen and heard. Having their child pushed off to the side, discarded as unimportant, just eats them away. Many of these parents have been receiving nothing but the silent treatment and filing a human rights complaint is a way of saying, HELLO!

Sometimes people want to know everything before they start something. Others feel it’s better to not know everything and just do it. Deal with things as they come up. For example, some people want to go to business school to learn how to start a business and some people just do it. It’s very interesting how people approach things.

What I do want to say is that you can’t depend on your experience being like someone else’s. It really can be so different depending on so many factors.

It’s impossible to predict the future. I don’t know what this experience is going to be like for you. One thing that I think is true for everyone, is that you will learn more bout yourself by navigating this system. You’ll find out where your boundary lines are, and what triggers you and moves you forward. Or, what you are willing to live with. I think there is potential for it to be an interesting journey, nonetheless. Advocacy always is.