Hds310 Human Rights | Employment Assessment Answers

Answer:

Introduction

When situations become impossible for individuals to deal with, it necessitates the interference of an external agent who shall be advocating in favour of the individual who had been a victim of violation of human rights. Lack of means or capacity, it could be in monetary terms, physical incapacity to bear the stress of the struggle, or even the mental strength to reconcile oneself to the fact that one has to fight the injustice. Advocacy with regard to human rights is but the task of helping out an individual whose rights have been violated by fighting on behalf of the victim for providing them with the rights they deserve (Stein, 2017). This is the definitional aspect of the broad subject matter about to be discussed in the essay.

Types of Advocacies

Advocacy of human rights is of seven types- Self Advocacy, Individual Advocacy, Carer Advocacy, Citizen Advocacy, Peer Advocacy, Professional Advocacy and Systemic Advocacy. These are the kind of advocacies that exist and their definitional explanation shall be provided in the subsequent sections. It can be deduced from the above discussion that the forms of advocacies have something in common in them, and that is the fact that all of it deals with some form of disability related issue, which could be both physical and mental. The difference lies in who plays the role of the care giver and what is the factor that governs the relationship between the care receiver and the provider of the care, whether it is selfless and philanthropic or it involves some form of exchange.

Advocacies play an active role in helping out the persons wrought with some form of disability or the other. They could be lawyers who would fight cases involving denial of rights and priviliges or instances when there have been gross violation of human rights; doctors who are trained in providing treatment for a specific ailment. The care providers could also be volunteers like students, NGOs, close acquaintances of the persons in need, who indulge in helpful activities as philanthropic indulgence. They maintain the utmost secrecy of the process and also provides the moral support to the victim (Nash, 2001).

Problem Statement

In this particular essay the issue of an epileptic patient shall be taken up for consideration who has been refused employment at an organization for disclosing the chronic ailment after being offered the post. He has provided an account of the requirements which he shall be needing so that adjustments could be made to suit his health conditions. This is a statement of the hypothetical situation provided, on which a personal judgement regarding what advocacy is appropriate and what is not shall be provided.

With regard to discrimination of diseased patients at workplace, two Australian legal provisions must be mentioned. One is the Disability Discrimination Act and the other, Work Health and Safety Act. The former imposes penalty on the employing organization for discriminating against aspirants with chronic ailments in providing employment. The latter can be invoked by the employing organization to either terminate or refuse employment to a chronically ill patient, on the grounds of maintaining workplace safety and a conducive environment for all the employees to be able to work peacefully. The current hypothetical situation provided for analysis is clearly reflective of a clash between both the legal provisions provided, given the nature of epilepsy. Patients suffering from epileptic conditions can go into experiencing bouts of seizures at any given point of time, which can pose as very serious sometimes and can send the persons in the surrounding into a state of panic. However, denying epileptics from employment is not a solution, they need assistance to be able to overcome the share of obstacles they are goaded into without their desire, and also the environment in which they belong so that it becomes easier for people to accept them and make provisions for them.

Possible Solutions to the Issue

The desired advocacies that could possibly be employed in this aspect are Citizen Advocacy, Peer Advocacy, Professional Advocacy and Systemic Advocacy.

Citizen Advocacy can be of immense help as an epileptic patient is constant need of support as the person suffering can fall sick at any given point of time. Citizen Advocacy refers to a system in which the care provider is in constant touch with the victim or the patient for providing him or her with the logistical help required on a regular basis so that the victim does not feel helpless. It is a long term commitment in which the victim and the care provider are supposed to be bound to each other (Goodley et al., 2010). Naturally, they will be needing assistance that has to be consistent and proactive enough to come to the rescue of the patient at any given point of time. Peer Advocacy is essential in this aspect as epilepsy is a complex medical condition which requires the intervention of an expert to deal with the intricacies of the issues entailed in epileptic conditions. Peer Advocacy is the form of care which is provided to the individual suffering from some form of ailment by certified personnel who have received adequate training in the specific field. Only experts can play the role of the care givers in this form of advocacies as this form of advocacy is based on clinical treatment to be provided to the ones in need. Naturally, this necessitates a degree of expertise (Goodley et al., 2010). Experts can provide medical assistance to the ones suffering from epilepsy as and when necessary so that the person suffering from the chronic disease could remain physically fit and have the capacity to work.

Professional Advocacy could be another option for giving due consideration for solving the issue. Professional Advocacy is unlike Carer Advocacy in the sense that the association between the provider of care and the ailing individual is very short lived. It is an issue based form of care providing system governed predominantly by corporatized structure and monetary concerns. The person in need contacts the providers of care in case a need crops up and receives the support in lieu of the payment made to the concerned individual (Goodley et al., 2010). It is deemed that matters in which monetary exchanges are involved, the work shall be more efficiently accomplished since the service provider is under an obligation to provide proper assistance which shall be worthy of the money being charged. It is also not always possible and desirable that service shall be available to someone at every point of time without the need of paying any remuneration. Philanthropic pursuits face certain constraints as they lack funds while professional agencies are more often than not equipped with all the necessary logistical help required for providing assistance.

Systemic Advocacy is not related to any treatment related help, but it is nevertheless very important. Systemic Advocacy is quite political in both intent and content. As the name suggests, it aims at bringing about a substantial change in the way the system functions. By the mention of the term system, the government is being meant. The purpose with which this form of advocacy functions is to influence the policy decisions of the government so that it goes in favour of the children who are wrought with some form of physical or mental disability (Goodley et al., 2010).  The employability of epileptic patients is not a very unique thing in Australia, and with proper medical support such patients can gather enough capacity to be able to work. It however unfair that the dumping of the onus of making the epileptic patient worthy of availing employment opportunities always be allowed to continue, without necessitating any change on the environment in which they are supposed to function. Assimilation and integration must be a two way process, not a one-sided affair.

Solutions less likely to solve the issue

The other three options left are Individual Advocacy, Self Advocacy and Carer Advocacy. Self Advocacy and Carer Advocacy can be considered however the chances of bringing about any fruitful result is very bleak.

 Only if the patient is strong willed enough to fight a case on the behalf of the self, Individual Advocacy can work out. Individual Advocacy refers to the programmes and initiatives undertaken to help out the ones suffering from some kind of mental problem and have been thereby been subjected to abuse and indifferent treatment. It is all about being the voice of the ones in need (Goodley et al., 2010).

Carer Advocacy shall only be beneficial in the early stages of diagnosing the issue. Carer Advocacy refers to the assistance and the help provided to an individual in identifying the kind of ailment or the illness that he or she is suffering from. It has to do with providing counselling and advisory role to the individual who is unaware of what the ailment is all about (Goodley et al., 2010).

 Self advocacy is however the only option which cannot be considered at all as it deals with mental ailments, while epilepsy is a physical one. Self Advocacy, as the name suggests, is basically being able to stand up for ones own rights as and when necessary. It can be accomplished in three ways preliminarily. Firstly, an individual has to identify the personal needs with clear precision. Secondly, the individual has to locate the means and the place from where the necessary help can be procured. Finally, the individual has to get in touch with an expert who shall be helping the person out with the nittigritties of the problem (Goodley et al., 2010).

Conclusion

In the concluding section, it can be deduced that in the entire discussion no definite method has been prescribed as the one having the capacity to solve the problem in entirety. The probable solutions are in combinations. However, only one method has been successfully inferred as totally unrelateable given the nature of the ailment it seeks to cure. This leads to the conclusion that the task of reaching at a solution has to be experimental and switching over from one method of advocacy to the other has to be done in case there is no positive response.

References

Goodley and Ramcharan; in Grant, G., Ramcharan, P., Flyn, M. & Richardson, M. (2010). Learning disability. Sheffield: University of Sheffield, Centre for Health and Social Care Research, Sheffield Hallam University; Lancashire County Council, Safeguarding Board, University of Sheffield.

Nash, A. (2001). Tools for action. People.dot.community: A resource for effective community activism. Geelong West, Vic.: Villamanta Legal Service Inc.

Stein, M. A. (2017). Disability human rights. In Nussbaum and Law (pp. 3-49). Routledge.