City rapped for excluding disabled boy from day camp

[Guest guest]

http://news.therecord.com/News/Local/article/757741

City rapped for excluding disabled boy from day camp

August 07, 2010

By Caldwell, Record staff

CAMBRIDGE — A disabled boy has been awarded $12,000 because he was excluded from

a summer camp run by the City of Cambridge.

The mother of the 10-year-old boy — who can't be identified — complained to the

Ontario Human Rights Tribunal after he was kept out of a day camp at the

Dolson Centre over behavioural issues in 2008.

Diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome, a form of autism characterized by

difficulties socializing, the boy had used derogatory racial terms and

experienced other problems at previous camps.

As a result, the city insisted he have a one-on-one support worker, but only

offered to provide one for two weeks — effectively excluding him from the camp

for the rest of the summer.

After a hearing before the tribunal, adjudicator Truemner found that

amounted to discrimination on the basis of disability.

Truemner ordered the city to pay the boy $12,000 for " injury to his dignity,

feelings and self-respect " and hire a consultant to review policies on

accommodating disabled children.

" These policies must be revised in order to ensure that special needs of

disabled children are addressed, " Truemner wrote in an 11-page decision.

The ruling refers to the boy and his mother only by their initials after the

adjudicator found his identity should be protected to spare him embarrassment

and stigma.

City officials declined to comment Friday because the lawyer who handled the

case was away.

The mother of the boy said she feels " validated " by the finding, but is doubtful

it will improve the way the city handles such situations.

She said her son now goes to private camps and is doing well without any extra

supervision.

The boy had attended the Cambridge camp for several summers before his use of

racial epithets brought concerns over his behaviour to a head.

Numerous city officials were involved in discussions with the boy's mother and a

decision was made to allow him at the camp only with an " inclusion facilitator. "

Truemner said the city may have been justified in requiring the extra help, but

discriminated against the boy by not providing it for the entire summer.

The city could have argued the costs of a one-on-one worker would have created

an " undue hardship, " but failed to specifically do so at the hearing.

Truemner also ruled the city didn't adequately explore other ways to accommodate

the boy, including an offer from his mother to pay for training for camp workers

on his disability and how to handle it.

The hearing was told the boy didn't even know the meaning of a racial slur he

used and was upset and apologetic after learning it was hurtful.