editing

Running Head: EDUCATION 1

EDUCATION 4

MOORE V. BRITISH COLUMBIA (EDUCATION)

Name:

Instructor:

Course Title:

Date:

Jeffrey Moore was suffering from dyslexia and he therefore received special treatment and education in the school which he attended. When he was in Grade 2, the psychologist who had been employed in the school recommended that Jeffrey should be taken to the local Diagnostic Centre for remediation since he wasn’t able to receive the assistance that he needed at the particular school. For this reason, Frederick Moore, Jeffrey’s father, transferred him to a private school and he filed a case with the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal against the public school. His case was filed on the grounds that Jeffrey had been denied a “service that was available to the public” (Moore v. British Columbia, 2012). The tribunal concluded that indeed Jeffrey had indeed been discriminated against by the Province and the District. The Tribunal ordered the District and the Province to issue systemic remedies. It also ordered that the school should reimburse the tuition costs that had been incurred in the private school. However, a reviewing judge ruled that there was no case of discrimination but this ruling was later appealed.

The School Act ensured that all the learners had the opportunity to “achieve their individual potential and acquire the knowledge, skills and attitudes needed to contribute to a healthy, democratic and pluralistic society and a prosperous and sustainable economy” (Moore v. British Columbia, 2012). Under the Human Rights Code of British Columbia, Section 8, Jeffrey was entitled to the service of education. Jeffrey was a special needs student because he required remediation. The Tribunal found that the District did not undertake any assessment of what alternatives were available to accommodate a special student such as Jeffrey if the services of the local Diagnostic Centre were terminated. Failing to undertake financial assessments undermined the argument of the District that it had no alternative in providing access to education for Jeffrey. In order for the District to conclude that it had no alternatives, it had to consider if any alternatives were available in the first place. For this reason, the finding of discrimination was upheld.

Decisions made with respect to access of education should consider even the special needs children. Education is a basic human right despite any learning challenges that may be presented by a particular student. A needs-based assessment ought to be conducted before the implementation of decisions to ensure that all parties are considered and cushioned against any arising repercussions of implementation. Failure to conduct the needs based assessment contributes to cases of Prima facie discrimination.

                   

References

Moore v. British Columbia (Education), 2012 SCC 61, [2012] 3 S.C.R. 360. Retrieved from https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/#search/jId=bc&text=school%20district&id=%20Moore%20v.%20British%20Columbia%20(Education)%2C%202012%20SCC%2061%2C%20%5B2012%5D%203%20S.C.R.%20360&includeSccJudgments=true&origJId=bc on November 18, 2017