26 Aug 06
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/5274354.stm
By Geoff Adams-Spink
Age & disability correspondent, BBC News website, New York
An international treaty that will give greater rights and freedoms to disabled people around the world has been agreed at the United Nations.
The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities was adopted in New York.
This is the first human rights treaty of the 21st Century, and the UN hopes it will mark a significant improvement in the treatment of disabled people.
The world's disabled population is estimated to be 650 million.
The thinking behind the convention is that welfare and charity should be replaced by new rights and freedoms.
US abstention.
Most notable among the countries that will not be signing the convention is the United States.
It says that it already has comprehensive laws on disability rights.
26 Aug 06
1 edit
Originally posted by ivanhoeWhen I went to England this summer I was really suprized at the lack of accessibility for the handicapped at places like Warwick and Blenheim castles. Obviously it is pretty muich impossible to put an elevator in a stone castle, but there were signs that said "No wheelchairs" which would not exactly make a wheelchair person feel welcome.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/5274354.stm
By Geoff Adams-Spink
Age & disability correspondent, BBC News website, New York
An international treaty that will give greater rights and freedoms to disabled people around the world has been agreed at the United Nations.
The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities was adopted i is the United States.
It says that it already has comprehensive laws on disability rights.
Two historic places in the US that have retrofitted to meet the needs of the disabled are Shakertown and the Biltmore Estate. These were done in such a way to maintain the historic nature of the places.
But England needs to retrofit the whole damn country with respect to toilets. Ain't a damn handicapped accessible toilet in the whole damn country. I hope the UN will apply sanctions.
26 Aug 06
Originally posted by kirksey957If I were disabled, I'd just crap on the floor of the bathroom and write on the wall that I couldn't get to the toiled due to my wheelchair.
When I went to England this summer I was really suprized at the lack of accessibility for the handicapped at places like Warwick and Blenheim castles. Obviously it is pretty muich impossible to put an elevator in a stone castle, but there were signs that said "No wheelchairs" which would not exactly make a wheelchair person feel welcome.
Two historic ...[text shortened]... handicapped accessible toilet in the whole damn country. I hope the UN will apply sanctions.
26 Aug 06
1 edit
Originally posted by kirksey957They have history in America ???
When I went to England this summer I was really suprized at the lack of accessibility for the handicapped at places like Warwick and Blenheim castles. Obviously it is pretty muich impossible to put an elevator in a stone castle, but there were signs that said "No wheelchairs" which would not exactly make a wheelchair person feel welcome.
Two historic handicapped accessible toilet in the whole damn country. I hope the UN will apply sanctions.
I think that you'll find that buildings protected by the national trust in the UK, can't be modified. Would you prefer a sign that says...
"wheel chair users, can try, but i don't fancy your chances...oh yeah, and make sure your health insurance is up to date " ?
Wheelchair access will've be denied for safety reasons.
- Joined
- 20 Jan 06
- Moves
- 104433
26 Aug 06
Originally posted by kirksey957i know what you mean. they probably have the same sign at Beckingham palace too 🙂
[b]When I went to England this summer I was really suprized at the lack of accessibility for the handicapped at places like Warwick and Blenheim castles. Obviously it is pretty muich impossible to put an elevator in a stone castle, but there were signs that said "No wheelchairs" which would not exactly make a wheelchair person feel welcome.
- Joined
- 20 Jan 06
- Moves
- 104433
26 Aug 06
Originally posted by ivanhoeGiven that UN treaties only provide a guide for a minimum standard amongst states, maybe the US laws are comprehensive enough and the target for these standards are developing countries or those that are lagging.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/5274354.stm
By Geoff Adams-Spink
Age & disability correspondent, BBC News website, New York
An international treaty that will give greater rights and freedoms to disabled people around the world has been agreed at the United Nations.
The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities was adopted i ...[text shortened]... is the United States.
It says that it already has comprehensive laws on disability rights.
without seeing what the standards are or the US argument for not signing the treaty, isn't the US health system up the creek anyway? maybe they oppose for economical reasons in implementing such standards [shrug] don't know.