Discrimination against handicapped children and securing their mobility in the field of general education
MONITORING REPORT
CONTENTS
Introduction Summary Methods Findings of the study Physical accessibility of comprehensive schools to physically handicapped persons Availability of competent teaching staff The phenomenon of physically handicapped children’s exclusion from general education Climate of tolerance and individual approach towards children with disabilities in comprehensive schools Children with disabilities getting education at home Provision of technical aids to physically handicapped underage persons (of 0 to 18 years of age) Conclusions Recommendations List of used documents List of used concepts and acronyms Annexes
3 6 7 8 9 10 11 14
17 19
21 21 23 24 26
2
INTRODUCTION
The issue of discrimination against handicapped children and of securing their mobility in the field of general education was selected, on the recommendation of the group selected from the RoA Gegharkunik region, as a subject for the monitoring to be conducted within the framework of the Human Rights: Step by Step Program.
The subject for the monitoring was selected on the basis of the argument put forward by a number of non-governmental organizations (Hooysie kamurj/Bridge of Hope, Havat/Faith, Prkutyun/Salvation and Kamq u korov/Will and Vigor) that deal with the education issues of children with disabilities. The NGOs contend that in the RoA regions on the average one out of ten disabled children (hereinafter the DC) is deprived of education as a result of the absence of the necessary conditions in schools. A comprehensive study on the underlying causes of the disabled children’s exclusion from general education, on the issues of their mobility and on the phenomenon of discrimination against disabled children had not been conducted in Gegharkunik region. Data had not been collected either. This conclusion is supported by the 31 October 2007 official letter provided by Gegharkunik Regional Governor’s Office. It says, “the issue of the disabled children’s exclusion from general education has not been studied in the region; therefore, the Regional Governor’s Office does not have sufficient data on how instruction is provided to disabled children and on how many children in the region do not attend school and do not get education.” Three non-governmental organizations dealing with the issues of disabled children operate in the region (the DC parents’ NGO Astghatsolk/Stella brightness in the town of Chambarak, the DC parents’ NGO Astghavard/Stellar Rose in the town of Vardenis, the Parents of children disabled since babyhood NGO in the town of Gavar. The two of those do not have a complete database on the children with disabilities and on the problems they face.
The goal of the monitoring is to contribute to the disabled children’s mobility and elimination of discrimination against them in the field of general education.
It was intended to attain the following objectives in the course of the monitoring:
Objective 1 was to check the existence of adequate conditions in comprehensive schools for disabled children to enjoy their right to education…
3
1.1.
to check the physical accessibility of comprehensive schools (ramps and
handrails) in the above-mentioned towns to physically handicapped persons; 1.2.
to check the availability of competent teaching staff in comprehensive
schools.
Objective 2 was to study in the comprehensive schools in the above-mentioned urban communities in Gegharkunik region: a) a climate of tolerance towards children with disabilities, b) an individual approach towards children with disabilities in comprehensive schools.
Objective 3 was to study in the comprehensive schools the phenomenon and the underlying causes of the disabled children’s exclusion from general education.
Objective 4 was to examine the situation with the provision of technical aids to physically handicapped underage persons (of 0 to 18 years of age).
Objective 5 was to make recommendations for relevant bodies on how to change the situation.
In the course of the monitoring the physical accessibility of 12 schools in 4 towns to physically handicapped persons was observed, interviews were conducted with the schools principals of those schools and questionnaires were filled out by 54 teachers, 69 students and 47 students with disabilities in comprehensive schools and by 49 parents of handicapped children.
The monitoring was conducted from September 15 to December 15, 2007 in Chambarak, Vardenis, Martuni and Sevan urban communities in Gegharkunik region.
The monitoring was conducted: in Chambarak – by Irina Hovhannisyan (Coordinator of the monitoring group, chairperson of Astghatsolk/Stella brightness NGO) and Nune Mirzoyan (lawyer); in Sevan – by Naira Hovsepyan (member of Center for regional development and studies NGO), Gheghine Gharibyan (teacher at comprehensive school # 6 in Sevan) and Manush Khzmalyan (Inspector at Center condominium in Sevan); 4
in Vardenis – by Garsevan Saghatelyan (Chairperson of Menq/We NGO) and Aram Khachatryan (member of Menq/We NGO); in Martuni – by Armen Bareghamyan (Chairperson of the Gegharkunik branch of Millennium NGO), Tigran Baghishjanyan (Zangak TV Company reporter), Sahak Sahakyan (Deputy Chairperson of the Gegharkunik branch of Millennium NGO) and Susanna Hageyan (member of the Gegharkunik branch of Millennium NGO).
In the course of the monitoring the group was confronted with the following obstacles: The Governor’s Office and local governments (LGs) in Gegharkunik region do not have information necessary for the monitoring; Some parents refused to talk to us or to let us talk to their children. There were cases when parents made threats to members of the monitoring group and forbade them to approach children. Some parents were concealing their child’s disability, as they were afraid of the possible negative attitude on the part of the public.
For the support given to the monitoring group we wish to express our gratitude to: Helsinki Committee of Armenia NGO, in the person of Avetik Ishkhanyan, Yelena Sargsyan, member of the Vanadzor Office of Helsinki Citizens Assembly, Lilit Simonyan, Projects Coordinator, Helsinki Committee of Armenia.
We also wish to thank for the provision of necessary information and support in the course of the monitoring: ¾
Gegharkunik Regional Governor Never Poghosyan,
¾
Gegharkunik Regional Deputy Governor Artush Ghukasyan,
¾
Heads of Chambarak, Sevan, Vardenis and Martuni urban communities ,
¾
Regional Agencies for Social Services and Heads of Regional Centers of
Social Security in Chambarak, Sevan, Vardenis and Martuni, ¾
Melanya Epremyan, Chairperson of the DC parents’ NGO Astghavard/Stellar
Rose.
5
The present Report is intended for the RoA Ministry of Education and Science, the RoA Ministry of Labor and Social Issues, Department of Education in the Gegharkunik Regional Governor’s Office, organizations that deal with the disabled persons’ issues as well as for other interested persons.
SUMMARY
The goal of the monitoring is to contribute to the disabled children’s mobility and elimination of discrimination against them in the field of general education. A comprehensive study on the underlying causes of the disabled children’s exclusion from general education, on the issues of their mobility and on the phenomenon of discrimination against disabled children had not been conducted in Gegharkunik region. Relevant data and facts had not been collected either.
Three non-governmental organizations dealing with the issues of disabled children operate in the region (the DC parents’ NGO Astghatsolk/Stella brightness in the town of Chambarak, the DC parents’ NGO Astghavard/Stellar Rose in the town of Vardenis, the Parents of children disabled since babyhood NGO in the town of Gavar. The two of those do not have a complete database on the children with disabilities and on the problems they face.
The present monitoring has confirmed the contention of a number of nongovernmental organizations, which deal with the education issues of children with disabilities, that in the RoA regions on the average one out of ten disabled children is deprived of education as a result of the absence of the necessary conditions in schools.
The study conducted by the monitoring group has demonstrated that the Armenian legislation as well as the RoA National Action Plan on the children’s rights protection for 2004-2025 are on the whole in line with international standards and principles. However, many rights and their implementation mechanisms (physical accessibility, inclusive education and mobility), which are recognized by and included in the international law, are not in fact secured in the Republic of Armenia. Besides, many provisions of the Armenian legislation are applied only partially. Thus, the greater part of the comprehensive schools in the towns under study is not physically accessible to physically handicapped persons. That, in its turn, impedes the enjoyment of the 6
right to education by children with disabilities. In particular, the schools do not have financial resources, specialists, special projects and property as well as textbooks, teaching materials and other devices to match the types of disability so as to ensure adequate education for handicapped children. In order to effect a positive change we recommend -
that the RoA Ministry of Education and Science take steps to create necessary
conditions for disabled children in the RoA institutions of general education as well as to create necessary conditions in the region to improve quality of education for disabled children and to restore the right to education for those disabled children who were excluded from education (professional development of teachers, provision of teaching materials, etc.); -
that the Department of Education in the Gegharkunik Regional Governor’s Office
establish control to improve quality of education for disabled children and to restore the right to education for those disabled children who were excluded from education; -
that local governments assign the guardianship and trusteeship commissions affiliated
with Town Halls a task of identifying the disabled children who were excluded from general education and of taking measures to organize provision of education for them; -
that non-governmental organizations take actions shaping positive attitudes of the
public towards disabled persons.
METHODS
The following methods were used in the course of the monitoring:
1. Analysis of documents. Studied were: ¾
databases of the three NGOs operating in the region,
¾
logs of provision of technical aids in regional Agencies for Social Services in
the towns of Chambarak, Sevan, Vardenis and Martuni, ¾
written responses received from Town Halls and from the Gegharkunik
Regional Governor’s Office.
2. Analysis of legislation. Studied were: International legislation ¾
Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
¾
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
7
¾
(European) Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental
Freedoms, ¾
European Social Charter;
Domestic legislation ¾
Armenian Constitution,
¾
RoA Law On Social Protection of Persons with Disabilities,
¾
RoA Law On Social Support,
¾
RoA Law On the Rights of the Child,
¾
RoA Law On Education,
¾
The 18 December 2003 RoA Government Decree # 1745-N On Approving the RoA National Action Plan on the Protection of the Children’s Rights,
¾
The 24 December 2003 RoA Government Decree # 1780-N On Approving the Procedure for the Provision of Prosthetic-Orthopedic Items, Restorative Technologies or Other Means.
3. Information collection (survey, interview) Interviews were held with principals of 12 schools with a view to gathering information. 43 disabled children, 49 parents of disabled children, 54 teachers and 69 students from the schools under study in the above-mentioned 4 towns were surveyed.
4. Observation. Entrances to and the conditions of buildings of 12 secondary schools in the towns of Chambarak, Vardenis, Sevan and Martuni were surveyed to ascertain whether they meet the needs of handicapped children.
FINDINGS OF THE STUDY
As per Article 39 of the Armenian Constitution, “Everyone has the right to education.”
According to Article 15 of the European Social Charter, “With a view to ensuring to persons with disabilities, irrespective of age and the nature and origin of their disabilities, the effective exercise of the right to independence, social integration and participation in the life of 8
the community, the Parties undertake … to take the necessary measures to provide persons with disabilities with … education and vocational training in the framework of general schemes…”.
As per Article 6 of the RoA Law On Education, “The Republic of Armenia secures the right to education without distinction of any kind, such as ethnicity, race, sex, religion, political or other opinion, social origin, and property or other status.”
According to Article 11 of the RoA Law On the Rights of the Child, “Every child has the right to get education and to choose an educational institution.” Article 26 of the same Law states that “children with disabilities can study in a comprehensive school, if they so wish.”
The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child does not promote a separate education system for children with disabilities. Quite the contrary, it clearly states that education should be conducive to “the fullest possible social integration.”
Physical accessibility of comprehensive schools to physically handicapped persons As per Article 21 of the RoA Law On Social Protection of Persons with Disabilities, “For the persons with disabilities, all categories of employers operating in the RoA territory shall ensure accessibility of social infrastructure facilities and of residential, public and production buildings and structures as well as the creation of conditions for those persons to make unimpeded use of public transportation, transportation facilities, communication and information facilities and places of recreation and leisure.”
According to Article 22 of the same Law, “the designing and development of localities, the formation of residential districts, the development of technical designs, the construction and re-construction of buildings and structures, including airports and railway stations, as well as the development and production of means of transportation, including vehicles for personal use, and of means of communication and information, shall not be permitted unless they are adapted for the use by and are accessible to persons with disabilities.”
9
“In case it is impossible to adapt the said facilities for the use by persons with disabilities, the relevant State bodies should plan and take necessary steps with a view to meeting the needs of persons with disabilities” (Article 23 of the same Law).
The observation of 12 comprehensive schools ascertained that only 2 of them meet the needs of handicapped persons.
Table 1. Availability of ramps in the observed schools (The data broken down by school are presented in Annex 9). Only principals of secondary schools #
Number of 12 schools 11
1 in Vardenis and # 1 in Sevan turned to their
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
superiors with the request of adapting the school buildings for the needs of children with disabilities. Instead of creating the necessary conditions in schools, the superiors gave the following answer, “Use the school financial
with ramps
without ramps
resources to organize schooling at home.” The monitoring group sent letters both to the Gegharkunik Regional Governor’s Office and to the Town Halls of the above-mentioned 4 towns requesting information concerning current or prospective programs for adapting the towns’ public facilities, especially comprehensive schools, for the needs of handicapped persons. According to the 31 October 2007 letter # M-1-873 of the Gegharkunik Regional Governor’s Office, “It has been stipulated that, regardless of who commissioned the work, ramps should be constructed, whenever schools in the region are renovated.” In its reply letter the Chambarak Town Hall stated, “No work is under way or planned to be undertaken in the near future in comprehensive schools and in other public facilities in Chambarak communities to bring them in line with the needs of physically handicapped persons.” In contrast to Chambarak, the written responses from the Vardenis, Sevan and Martuni Town Halls expressed their willingness to include the necessary expenditure in relevant budget lines in their communities’ 2008 budgets so as to make comprehensive schools accessible to handicapped persons.
Availability of competent teaching staff
10
Article 12 of the RoA Law On Social Protection of Persons with Disabilities makes it incumbent on the State to secure the right of persons with disabilities to education and professional training and to train teaching staff adequate to the task. In line with an individual rehabilitation plan of the disabled person, the bodies of the State education system together with social security and health care bodies provide preschool, education to disabled children and create necessary conditions for persons with disabilities to get secondary, technical and higher education. The RoA National Action Plan on the children’s rights protection for 2004-2025 intends to enhance social, psychological and special education services in institutions of general education.
None of the observed schools has special-ed teachers, speech therapists or psychologists. Only secondary schools # 6 in Sevan and # 1 and # 3 in Martuni have students’ individual development/education plans.
Thus, even though the legislation guarantees to the Armenian citizens the provision and protection of the right to education enshrined in the Constitution, however, in reality 12 comprehensive schools in the towns of Chambarak, Vardenis, Sevan and Martuni have nearly no conditions, including elementary ones, for the provision of education to disabled children.
The phenomenon of physically handicapped children’s exclusion from general education
The types of disability of children in the towns in question are presented in Annex 6. Interviewed were principals of 12 comprehensive schools (3 schools in each town), 54 teachers, 69 students, 47 students with disabilities and 49 parents of disabled children. (The breakdown of interviewees by town is presented in Table 2).
Table 2
Chambarak Vardenis Sevan Martuni
3 3 3 3
15 12 15 11
15 19 20 15
15 22 10 --
Parents of students with disabilities
Students with disabilities
Students
Teachers
Number of respondents School principals
Town
10 12 20 7
11
The principals of 6 (or 50%) of the researched 12 schools pointed out that in their neighborhoods there are disabled children that do not attend school. They pointed out the following as the reason for non-attendance of school: ¾ In Chambarak – “Children have mental retardation-related problems, while schools do not have adequate conditions to organize education for them”; ¾ In Vardenis – “Schools do not have necessary facilities and resources to ensure adequate education for disabled children”; ¾ In Martuni – “Those children cannot move around on their own.” ¾ In Sevan – “I do not know.”
Only principals of secondary schools # 3 in Vardenis and # 1 in Martuni took steps to get disabled children to school. According to the school principal from Vardenis, in order to achieve that he had to explain things to their parents.
As a result of the steps taken: ¾
In secondary school # 2 in Vardenis - Owing to the absence of specialists and other necessary conditions one physically handicapped child dropped out of school;
¾
In secondary school # 1 in Martuni – stationery was provided and teaching was provided for some time at the student’s home.
Some school principals in Martuni did not know how many disabled children there are in the student body and what category of disability those students have. According to them the reason is that parents do not submit relevant medical documents, while principals do not insist, as they believe it is a totally private matter. In the view of principals of two schools, the legislation does not give them leverage to check if children applying to or studying at the school have a disability.
A parent of one of the disabled students threatened to move the child to another school, if the school principal discloses the fact of the child having a disability.
Teachers’ views on the reasons of the disabled students’ non-attendance of school are presented in Table 3.
12
Question Are you aware about the DC who do not attend school?
Chambarak No -10
Vardenis No - 6
Sevan No -14
No - 3
Yes - 5
Yes - 6
Yes - 1
Yes - 8
They have mental retardation-related problems - 1 Parents do not find their attendance advisable -1 The school does not have adequate conditions - 4
The level is not sufficient –1
They do not have a wheelchair 2 The issue of transportation is not solved by a wheelchair - 3 They have problems with peers 1 They are from poor families - 1 I do not know - 4
No -5
Yes -6
No -1
Yes - 6 No - 4 Other -1
Schools should have psychologists, physical plan that would provide adequate facilities for the DC, specialists and textbooks, and the problem of the DC transportation to/from school should be solved.
Specially trained teachers, specially designed furniture and adequate school building conditions.
What is the They have mental reason of retardation-related their non- problems - 5 attendance of school?
Have you taken any steps to get those children to school? What the DC educationrelated changes would you like to see occurring in school?
The school should have teachers trained to work with deaf and/or mite students and other specialists, The psychological special literature climate should be and a ramp. improved.
Martuni
Adequate conditions should be created for disabled children. Teachers who go to teach special students at home should be paid at a higher rate. Disabled children should study in special schools. Other students should be more tolerant of the DC. A ramp should be constructed.
Thus, 20 (37.7%) out of 53 interviewed teachers supported the view that there are disabled children that do not attend school. However, a half of those teachers did not take any steps to help bring those children to school.
They mentioned the following as reasons of non-attendance of school: ¾ absence of appropriate conditions in schools; ¾ children are not adequately provided with technical aids and they have problems with their peers.
13
14 (or 20.3%) of the interviewed 69 students pointed out that there are disabled children that do not attend school. In the students’ opinion, those children do not attend school because: ¾ the school does not have ramps, ¾ there are no specialists in schools, ¾ these children have psychological complexes.
According to the written accounts by principals of schools # 1, 2 and 3 in Martuni, 3 disabled children study in their schools. The monitoring group found out that there are 19 disabled students in those schools. Thus, one can conclude that either the school principal does not posses the entire information or children and their parents conceal disability.
Climate of tolerance and individual approach towards children with disabilities in comprehensive schools
The principals of all the schools in this study qualified as “positive” the attitude of classmates to disabled students in their schools. They pointed out that instances of intolerance against children with disabilities do not occur and that all students participate equally in all the events staged at school.
The teachers have a somewhat different view of the tolerant attitudes towards children with disabilities at school (See Table 4).
Thus, in contrast to the surveyed teachers in the towns of Vardenis and Sevan, 7 (or 13.2%) of the surveyed teachers in Chambarak and Martuni pointed out that disabled children are ridiculed and mimicked at school.
Table 4 Tolerance towards children with disabilities in the studied schools
14
37 (or 69.8%) of the surveyed teachers indicated that intolerant
attitudes
towards
Ridicule, mimic, 13.2%
disabled children are neutralized through educational talks and that an individual approach is taken towards disabled students.
Good attitude ,
86.8%
The findings of the surveys of teachers made it clear that disabled children in the towns of Chambarak and Vardenis take part in the events staged at school. However, in the towns of Sevan and Martuni ten (18.9%) of the surveyed teachers in the schools under study pointed out that disabled students do not take part in the activities organized at school. 29 (54.7%) of the surveyed 53 teachers stated that steps are not taken to seriously integrate disabled students into school life.
Interviews with students demonstrated that in all the schools covered by this study the students mix with their handicapped classmates. They qualify the attitudes of both teachers and other students to disabled students for the most part as good, sometimes even as very good.
Students from Chambarak and Sevan unequivocally replied “no” to the question of “Were there disabled students-related conflicts or problems in the school?” 4 (almost one-fifth) of the 19 students surveyed in Vardenis and around one-fifth of the students surveyed in Martuni maintained that such conflicts and problems did in fact occur. They pointed out that emerging problems are solved through the interference of teachers who conduct educational talks.
The majority of the surveyed students gave the following responses to the question, “What would you like to see changed in your class and in school?” In Chambarak: ¾ nothing should be changed, ¾ individual problems should not be discussed publicly, In Sevan: ¾ nothing should be changed, In Martuni: 15
¾ school building conditions are not adapted to the needs of disabled persons, ¾ public at large should be more tolerant of persons with disabilities.
The majority of the respondents gave answers unrelated to the main issue covered by the questionnaire.
Also surveyed were 47 disabled children that attend comprehensive schools. They regarded the schoolteachers’ and classmates’ attitudes towards them as good and pointed out that they mix with all classmates. The events staged at school are attended by: 3 (20%) of the 15 students surveyed in Chambarak, 21 (95.5%) of the 22 students surveyed in Vardenis, and 9 (90%) of the 10 students surveyed in Sevan.
Embarrassment was mentioned as a main reason for non-attendance.
The responses given by teachers from Chambarak conflict with the responses given by disabled students from the same town since data in Table 3 clearly indicate that in teachers’ view the disabled children for the most part attend the activities staged by the school.
The disabled students gave the following answers to the question of “What would you like to see changed in your class and in school?” In Chambarak: ¾ nothing should be changed In Vardenis: ¾ a ramp should be constructed, ¾ the school should have special furniture In Sevan: ¾ teacher/student relations, ¾ there should be reciprocal respect, ¾ nothing should be changed. Some respondents found it hard to give a definitive answer or gave answers, which were not related to the main issue of the questionnaire.
16
Table 5. The results of the survey of the disabled children’s parents on the attitudes towards their children Question What attitude do peers have towards your child at school?
Chambarak Vardenis Good - 10 Good -8 Very good - 2 Hard to say - 2
What is teachers’ attitude?
Good - 10
Good – 11 Very good - 1
Does your child take part in school events?
Yes - 8 No - 2
Yes - 7 No - 4 Sometimes -1
Sevan Good -10 Very good - 5 Not particularly good -5 Good -16 Very good -3 Bad - 1 Yes - 11 No - 9
Martuni Good - 6 Very good - 1
Normal - 6 Very good -1 Yes - 4 No - 1 Sometimes - 2
It follows from the table that the disabled children’s parents assess both the teachers’ and peers’ attitudes towards their children as good and even as very good. The children of the 14 (29.8%) out of the 47 surveyed parents do not take part in the events staged at school. Some of the disabled children’s parents (58% in Martuni and 20% in Sevan) conceal the fact that their child has a disability and justify their stand by saying that they do not want their child to go through additional stresses. This is evidence that there is discriminatory attitude against those children in the society at large. The disabled children’s participation in school events is also low. Teachers explain that by ridicule and mimicking that disabled children are subjected to. One of the teachers in a comprehensive school gave the following answer to the question of why disabled children do not attend school,
“Their level is not sufficient.”
Children with disabilities getting education at home
Schools # 1 in Chambarak, # 1 and # 3 in Vardenis, # 8 in Sevan and # 3 in Martuni have physically handicapped students. According to the data provided by the school principals, their education is provided in line with the school curriculum. According to the school principals from Vardenis, physically handicapped students’ education at home is given through a customized individual program of study. In Chambarak and Vardenis the teachers engaged in teaching at home were selected by school principal, while in Vardenis
17
and Sevan, by school principal and by the student’s parent. In all instances the textbooks were provided by school for free.
The teachers gave the following answers to the question, “In your view, what needs to be done so that education becomes most accessible to disabled children?”
In Chambarak: ¾ provision of not only adequate building conditions but also of speciallytrained teachers and special teaching materials, ¾ activities aimed at molding positive public opinion, In Vardenis: ¾ to create adequate building conditions, ¾ to solve the problem of obtaining specially-trained educator and special publications, In Sevan: ¾ to engage disabled children in special-education schools, ¾ to have at schools a special educator and programs for individual development, In Martuni: ¾ financial resources are needed to organize provision of education to disabled children, ¾ adequate conditions should be created for physically handicapped persons.
As evidenced by the results of the survey of the disabled children’s parents, seven of their children get education at home. 39 children study in comprehensive school and one in a special-education school. 5 children do not get any instruction at all.
It is for the most part a school principal that selects a teacher to teach students at home. The parents noted that they do not pay the teachers for their services. 3 parents voiced an opinion that their children do not get true education since teachers engaged in home education teach only part of the time assigned for school classes. One parent could not give a definitive answer.
18
Provision of technical aids to physically handicapped underage persons (of 0 to 18 years of age)
As per Article 15 of the European Social Charter, “With a view to ensuring to persons with disabilities, irrespective of age and the nature and origin of their disabilities, the effective exercise of the right to independence, social integration and participation in the life of the community, the Parties undertake … to promote their full social integration and participation in the life of the community in particular through measures, including technical aids, aiming to overcome barriers to take the necessary measures to communication and mobility and enabling access to transport, housing, cultural activities and leisure.”
According to Article 4 of the RoA Law On Social Support, “The main goal of social support is to meet basic needs of persons who got into a difficult situation in life, to create conditions for their social integration, to promote their potential of self-help and of solving the emerging problems by themselves, to avert their social exclusion and to assist in the solution of their social and financial problems.”
As per Article 26 of the RoA Law On the Rights of the Child, “The State and its relevant bodies shall organize the production and purchase of technical aids necessary for life and activities of disabled children. Children with disabilities have the right to ordering, having repaired and getting for free, through the procedure established by the RoA Government, the wheelchairs, special prosthetic-orthopedic footwear and all sorts of prosthetic devices (with the exception of a set of dentures made of expensive metals) and other technical aids (objects) necessary for life and activities of disabled children, with the costs to be covered from the RoA State budget and from other sources not prohibited by the legislation.”
According to the 24 December 2003 RoA Government Decree # 1780-N on the procedure for the provision of prosthetic-orthopedic items, restorative technologies or other means, the prosthetic-orthopedic items, restorative technologies and other means are provided to disabled persons for free, with the costs to be covered from the RoA State budget and from other sources not prohibited by the legislation.
“3. Prosthetic-orthopedic items shall be provided to disabled persons in compliance with the individual rehabilitation programs and on the basis of a written conclusion by the 19
organization’s doctor (or a specialist that produces prosthetic devices) (with the exception of cases specified in Clause 5 of this Regulation) and for the prosthetic-orthopedic devices use timeframe set in Clause 26 of this Regulation. 4. The repair of the prosthetic-orthopedic devices provided to disabled persons shall be done by the providing organization with the costs to be covered from the RoA State budget. 5. The provision of prosthetic and orthopedic devices to disabled persons for upper and lower extremities for the first time shall be done on the basis of the written conclusion by medical-technical commission set up by the RoA Minister of Labor & Social Issues.”
The provision of technical aids was studied in the region with the sample of 65 disabled children aged 0-18, 47 of whom were of school age.
The study has shown that in the above-mentioned urban communities there are no disabled children of pre-school age who were not provided with technical aids. As regards school-age children, only 4 of them do not have technical aids. One of them needs a splint for foot (in the town of Vardenis) and three need eyeglasses (in the town of Sevan).
Table 6. Disabled children’s needs for technical aids (TA), according to their parents Question
Is your child provided with the necessary AT?
Chambarak
Vardenis
Sevan Yes - 20
Martuni Yes - 1
Yes - 3
Yes -7
There was no need -7
No -1
No -3
There was no need - 4 Provided by NGO -3 Provided by RASS -3 I bought it -1 No -10 (There was no need) I bought a new one -1
There was no need -3
How did you get it?
Provided by NGO - 1 Provided by Regional Agency for Social Services (RASS) - 2
Have you ever applied to get it repaired?
No - 3 (There was no need)
I bought it -12 Provided by RASS -4 Provided by sponsor 4
Provided by German Red Cross -1 Yes -1
Was it repaired?
Yes - 5 No -14 (There was no need) I bought a new one -1 Yes - 5
Yes -1
Did you pay for repair?
Yes - 5
No - 1
They have all the rights -9 It’s hard to say -11
I do not know 4 They do not have - 2 They have the
What rights, do you think, the persons officially recognized as disabled have in the Republic of Armenia?
I do not know -7 They have privileges -3
I do not know -8 I am only partially informed - 4
20
What suggestions / comments do you have?
Awareness-raising measures about the rights should be carried out for DC parents
Awarenessraising measures about the rights should be taken; Ramps should be constructed in schools; Funding should be provided to schools to organize schooling at home;
An NGO dealing with the DC rights should be set up in the town; Adequate conditions for DC education should be created at schools;
right to get medication for free -1 Adequate conditions for DC should be created at schools; The DC transportation problem should be solved at the Government level; Adequate conditions should be created for DC to become fullfledged members of the society;
Thus, children of 31 (65.9%) of the 47 parents surveyed in the above-mentioned towns are provided with necessary technical aids. 14 (29.8%) of them are not at this point in need of technical aids. 4 (8.5%) children are not provided with technical aids. 34 (72.3%) of the respondents are not aware of their rights.
CONCLUSIONS
Our study has ascertained that 9
even though the legislation guarantees to the Armenian citizens the provision and protection of the right to education, in reality, however,12 comprehensive schools in the towns of Chambarak, Vardenis, Sevan and Martuni adequate conditions for the provision of education to disabled children have not been created, in particular school buildings do not have ramps;
9
schools do not have necessary specialists;
9
there are disabled children in the region who do not get education;
9
instances of intolerance against disabled children are observed in schools;
9
there are discriminatory attitudes against disabled children in the society at large;
9
parents of the disabled children are not aware of the rights that persons with disabilities have in the Republic of Armenia.
RECOMMENDATIONS 21
To the RoA State Language Inspectorate: 9
Since the word “invalid” used in the RoA legislation conflicts with the present-day ethical norms and contains connotations of inequality, we recommend that the term “invalid” be replaced with some other one.
To the Armenian National Assembly: 9
The term “invalid” should be replaced in the RoA legislation with a term to be suggested by the State Language Inspectorate.
To the Armenian President, Government and the National Assembly: 9
In order to secure mechanisms for the enjoyment, effective protection and constant monitoring of the rights of disabled persons appropriate actions should be undertaken for the ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (adopted by the UN General Assembly on 13 December 2006).
To the RoA Ministry of Labor & Social Issues: 9
Public awareness should be raised about the procedure for the provision of technical aids and control should be exercised over the provision of those aids;
9
The institution of social worker should be further developed so as to ensure that an individual approach is taken in working with disabled persons and with their family members.
To the RoA Ministry of Education and Science: 9
Steps should be taken to create necessary conditions for disabled children in the RoA institutions of general education;
9
Necessary conditions should be created in the region to improve quality of education for disabled children and to restore the right to education for those disabled children who were excluded from education (professional development of teachers, provision of teaching materials, etc.);
9
Schools should be staffed with psychologists who should be relied on to improve the climate of tolerance in schools towards children with disabilities.
To the Department of Education in the Gegharkunik Regional Governor’s Office: 22
9
Control should be established to improve quality of education for disabled children and the right to education should be restored for those disabled children who were excluded from education;
To local governments: 9
Steps should be taken to make educational and other facilities accessible to handicapped persons (construction of ramps, placement of handrails);
9
Control should be established over the compliance of the technical design and financial estimate documentations to the RoA urban development norms;
9
The guardianship and trusteeship commissions affiliated with Town Halls should be assigned a task of identifying the disabled children who were excluded from general education and of taking measures to organize provision of education for them.
To non-governmental organizations: 9
A large-scale awareness-raising campaign should be launched for persons with disabilities and for their family members about the relevant RoA legislation;
9
Advocacy campaigns should be mounted to secure the disabled children’s right to education.
9
Bold efforts should be put forth to prompt local governments to ensure handicapped persons’ access in their communities to buildings and structures, engaging both NGOs and Regional Governors’ Offices in those activities;
9
Round table discussions should be held with the LG participation so as to design and execute actions for social integration of disabled children;
9
Actions should be taken to shape positive attitudes of the general public towards disabled persons.
LIST OF USED DOCUMENTS Universal Declaration of Human Rights, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, (European) Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, European Social Charter; Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (adopted by the UN General Assembly on 13 December 2006); Armenian Constitution, 23
RoA Law On Social Protection of Persons with Disabilities, RoA Law On Social Support, RoA Law On the Rights of the Child, RoA Law On Education, The 18 December 2003 RoA Government Decree # 1745-N On Approving the RoA National Action Plan on the Protection of the Children’s Rights, The 24 December 2003 RoA Government Decree # 1780-N On Approving the Procedure for the Provision of Prosthetic-Orthopedic Items, Restorative Technologies or Other Means.
List of Acronyms
1. PHP – physically handicapped persons, 2. DC – disabled children, 3. DP – disabled persons, 4. RASS - Regional Agency for Social Services, 5. RASSec - Regional Agency for Social Security, 6. TA – technical aids
24
ANNEXES
1. Questionnaire for principals of comprehensive schools 2. Questionnaire for teachers of comprehensive schools 3. Questionnaire for students of comprehensive schools 4. Questionnaire for disabled children 5. Questionnaire for parents of disabled children 6. Overall picture of diseases of disabled children in the region’s towns covered by this study 7. Survey results: Teachers on attitudes towards disabled children 8. Situation with TA provision in the region’s towns covered by this study 9. Results of observation of ramps and handrails in entrances to school buildings. 10. General information about disabled children in the schools covered by this study.
25
ANNEX 6 Overall picture of diseases of disabled children in the region’s towns covered by this study
Town Chambarak
Vardenis
Sevan
Martuni
Name of Disease Epilepsy Dislocation Inborn fragility of bones Encephalitis Familial paroxysmal polyserositis Rachitis Children’s cerebral stroke Children’s cerebral stroke Plexitis Dislocation Familial paroxysmal polyserositis Epilepsy Hearing impairment Pancreatic diabetes Leucosis Visual impairment Hearing impairment Muteness Parathoresis Children’s cerebral stroke Dislocation Epilepsy Encephalopathy Impairment of locomotor function Familial paroxysmal polyserositis Children’s cerebral stroke Scoliosis Paresis
Number of children 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 Total: 11 9 3 3 1 2 2 2 Total: 22 2 4 3 1 1 1 1 9 1 4 2 Total: 29 4 8 7 Total: 19
26
ANNEX 7 Survey results: Teachers on attitudes towards disabled children Question
Chambarak
Vardenis
Sevan
Positive - 12
Good - 11
Good - 12
There are instances of ridicule - 3
When under our control – good - 1
Very good - 3
Have there been incidents of intolerance? How are such incidents regulated?
Yes (they mimicked their steps or actions)-3 Educating the students - 3
Yes – 2 No - 10
No -15
What DC-related problems emerge in the education process?
Children with locomotor apparatus problems have difficulty in moving around -1
Instruction does not meet the requirements of the standard school course of study – 1
No problems – 6
Children with hearing impairment have problems with understanding – 1
They need individual approach –4
Children with hearing impairment have problems with understanding – 5
What are other students’ attitudes towards their PHP classmates?
Is individual approach applied in teaching the PHP students? How is that approach reflected?
Do the DC take part in school events?
What steps do you take to fully integrate the DC into school routine?
Yes – 1 No - 14
No - 2
material is explained in a simpler way - 1
We are more attentive – 1; Teaching them at home – 2; Simple assignments are given – 2; We encourage them and we are more tolerant of them –3; No answer - 3 Yes – 5; Depending on their personal capacities – 2; No, since they have complexes – 2; They are embarrassed – 2; No steps are taken – 9; We give them simple assignments – 2.
Having talks to explain things - 2
No problems arise 13
No problems - 7
Yes - 15
Yes - 12
Psychological support is provided; individual assignments are given; material is explained in a simpler way - 15
Assignments that are given match their potential – 7;
Student in wheelchair – rarely – 1; For the most part yes – 10; Yes – 4;
Yes – 12;
No steps are taken – 5; We encourage and support them – 10;
We create better conditions for them – 1; We give them assignments – 1;
Martuni Ridicule – 2 Normal – 2 More inclined to help – 1 No answer - 6 Yes (mimicking – 4, ridiculing – 1) No answer - 6 Having talks to explain things – 2 No answer - 3 Those children fee inferior &have problems with understanding the material – 3 They withdraw –1 It is impossible to teach at home the way you teach at school – 2 Depends on specifics of the disease – 1 They require more attention – 1 No problems arise 3 Yes - 9
Children with visual impairment have problems – 8
Children with hearing impairment do not speak well 1
We encourage and help them - 5
Yes – 11; No – 4;
No steps are taken – 15;
27
ANNEX 8 Situation with TA provision in the region’s towns covered by this study
Town Chambarak
Vardenis
Sevan
Martuni
Type of required TA Hearing aid – 3, Orthopedic devices – 2, Sound-producing device (in throat) – 1, wheelchair – 2; Artificial limb – 2, Wheelchair – 2, Walker – 1, Hearing aid – 2. Hearing aid – 6, Orthopedic devices – 3, Sound-producing device (in throat) – 1, Prosthetic device – 7, Wheelchair – 2, Corset – 1. Data have not been obtained.
Provision DP are provided with required TA.
Problems specific to the town DP are not well aware about the documentation necessary for getting TA and about the timeframe for submitting it.
One person has not been provided with TA.
DP are not informed well about the RoA legislation that regulates the TA provision.
Three persons have not been provided with TA.
DP are not aware about the RoA legislation that regulates the TA provision.
Notes Wheelchairs were provided by Astghatsolk NGO. TA are not manufactured in the Republic of Armenia. Persons not provided with TA have never applied to appropriate bodies.
28
ANNEX 9. Results of observation of ramps and handrails in entrances to school buildings
Town Chambarak
Secondary school # 1
School
Vardenis
Secondary schools # 2 & # 3 Secondary schools # 1, 2 & 3
Sevan
Secondary schools # 6, 7 & 8
Martuni
Secondary school # 1 Secondary school # 2 Secondary school # 3
Availability of ramps & handrails - 1 ramp with handrail near the school entrance; - 4 ramps without handrail in the hall leading to the main school building.
No ramps or handrails
1 ramp without handrail near the school entrance; Construction of a ramp at the entrance is in progress.
ANNEX 10. General information about disabled children in the schools covered by this study Town
School #
Chambarak
Vardenis Sevan
Martuni
Number of DC students at school
#1 #2
Number of enrolled students 266 366
#3 #1 #2 #3 #6 #7 #8 #1 #2 #3
287 645 739 501 150 513 272 522 586 804
1 11 4 7 1 4 2 1 1 1
1 3
Type of disability
PHP PHP, visual impairment, speech problems PHP PHP, mental retardation PHP, mental retardation PHP, mental retardation PHP PHP PHP PHP Visual impairment PHP
29