Tina Molyneux

DHI presentation

December 6th 2011

Why this Inquiry?

• Evidence of serious cases of abuse including Pilkington

• But, serious cases only tip of the iceberg

• For many harassment is commonplace and goes un-reported

• Apparent failure of public authorities to recognise extent of disability related harassment

• Previous research on the safety and security of disabled people

EHRC definition of disability-related harassment

• Unwanted, exploitative or abusive conduct against disabled people which has the purpose or effect of either:

– Violating the dignity, safety, security or autonomy of the person experiencing it, or

– Creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading or offensive environment.

• Types of harassment described by disabled people included:

– name calling – damage to property – exploitation, theft and fraud – anti-social behavior – cyber bullying and cyber harassment– sexual abuse, rape and sexual assault, and– physical assault, ranging from lower level assaults up to murder

Forms of harassment

Forms of harassment

• ‘I have a learning disability and ever since I was a child I have been called names like “spastic” and taunted because I can’t read and write.’

• ‘I have been hit by a stranger and beaten up by young people. They tried to push me through a chip shop window. When someone tried to help me by putting me in their car, they started rocking the car.’

Hidden in plain sight

• High profile cases – the most public example of a profound social problem

• A culture of disbelief exists around the issue• Fear of crime and its impact are greater for disabled

people• Significant under-reporting - concerns about reporting

process/ negative reporting experiences, fear of consequences, lack of confidence in public bodies

Systemic institutional failure

• Incidents often dealt with in isolation • Lack of consideration of disability as a motivating factor• Opportunities to stop harassment are missed • Focus on the behavior and ‘vulnerability’ of the victim rather

than the perpetrator• Failure of agencies to work together to stop harassment• Little investment to understand the causes and prevention• Barriers to reporting and recording across all sectors • Barriers accessing justice/ perpetrators face few

consequences• A lack of shared learning across agencies

Manifesto for Change• All agencies can improve their performance in

preventing and dealing with disability related harassment

• Inquiry report recommendations • Working over the next 6 months

– Are these the right steps?– How will they work?– Anything else that might be more effective?

• Ensure that public authorities take ownership and responsibility for these actions

Seven core cross-sectoral recommendations

• Ownership/commitment critical to dealing with disability-related harassment

• Definitive data is available • More responsive and accessible criminal justice system• Better understanding of perpetrators motivations and

circumstances• More positive attitude in the wider community toward

disabled people• Promising approaches to preventing and responding to

harassment which are evaluated • All frontline staff receive effective guidance and training

Recommendations for national government

• Amend Schedule 21 guidance to give parity in sentencing guidelines for all types of identity-based hate crime murders.

• Revise the ‘No Secrets’ guidelines in England as suggested by the Law Commission. In the longer-term, ‘No Secrets’ should be replaced by a rights-based approach replacing a perception of individual vulnerability with one which sees disabled people as being ‘at risk of harm’.

• Keep OFSTED’s ability to make limiting judgements where schools underperform in equalities-related areas, and especially in identity-based bullying.

• Report sets out specific recommendations in relation to criminal justice sector, local government and partnerships, transport, housing, health and social care, education and their sector inspectorates and regulators.

• Police - take a prompt lead in investigating all repeat cases and repeat cases should automatically have a high priority status.

• Prosecutors – change of language in relation to Special Measures with a focus on securing an equitable service, a simpler and more streamlined approach for receiving them that is monitored.

• Local government – play a lead role in developing partnerships, that are accessible for disabled people to join, review priority given to harassment. Ensure that advocacy and support services are adequate and accessible

• Transport – design out potential for conflict in new fleet and transport infrastructure design.

Sector specific recommendations

Sector specific recommendations

• Housing – interventions to prevent harassment occurring and it escalating, provisions against harassment should be included in tenancy agreements.

• Health and social care – health services should ensure their safeguarding alert processes are robust and staff are adequately trained.

• Schools – should develop material on the social model of disability, to better understand the prejudice faced by disabled people and to tackle harassment when it occurs.

• Inspectorates & regulators – always intervene in serious cases, common standards and criteria, joint inspection.

Manifesto for Change

• Taken together recommendations constitute a comprehensive approach

• Progress them in partnership with the various groups and agencies

• Publishing Manifesto Spring 2012

• Not just public bodies who need to act differently, it’s all of us................

‘Building a society built on fairness and respect where people are confident in all aspects of their diversity.’