Accommodation Issues for Canadian Law Students with Disabilities:

Accommodation Issues for Canadian Law Students with Disabilities:

Insights and Challenges

Ravi A. Malhotra, LLB., M.A., LL.M. Candidate

Disability Rights Activist

Graduate Student, Harvard University Law School

46 Lynwood Ave.

Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1Y 2B3

malhotra@magma.ca

Accommodation Issues for Canadian Law Students with Disabilities: Insights and Challenges

The accommodation of post-secondary students with disabilities remains a crucial policy arena for people with disabilities at the turn of the twenty-first century. Repeated studies have indicated that university education is generally correlated with greater income and social status. This is especially true for legal education where successful completion of the degree and admission to the Bar open the door to one of the most exciting, rewarding and, in some cases, lucrative careers. Yet significant barriers for law students with disabilities of all types remain, notwithstanding the protections enshrined in the various provincial and territorial Human Rights Codes across Canada and the promise of equality to people with disabilities contained in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This paper attempts to examine the experiences of law students with disabilities in Canada in order to gain a sense of the best practices currently in place, as well as the barriers, physical and attitudinal, that exist and practical ways in which they may be overcome. The analysis that follows is based on multi-phase research conducted by Reach, an Ottawa-based disability rights organization, that examined the experiences of law school and Bar exam students with mobility, learning, sensory, chronic pain and other disabilities from across the country. This work is contained in A Framework for Action: Law Schools, Educational Equity and Students with Disabilities, by Sandra A. Goundry and Yvonne Peters^{^[i]} and Navigating Law School and Beyond: A Practical Guide for Students Who Have Disabilities^{^[ii]}, edited by Allan McChesney. Space limitations preclude a discussion of the unique issues in Quebec and in

the Bar Admission Course but interested readers may refer to the above sources.

Some brief comments on the methodology of the two reports may be helpful. The first study, A Framework for Action, interviewed representatives from law schools across Canada. All twenty law schools were contacted and staff at thirteen agreed to an interview. A review of relevant legal and social policy research was also conducted. Finally, a brief review of relevant human rights and Charter case law was undertaken.

In Navigating Law School and Beyond, much of the information was obtained through surveys distributed across Canada to law students with disabilities. Students with disabilities were asked to describe both the barriers encountered and useful accommodations that they had been provided with and to share their personal insights on prospering at law school. Valuable focus groups with law school students with disabilities were also held in four provinces. Staff at every Canadian law school were also contacted frequently to both facilitate direct, confidential contacts between students with disabilities and the project’s researchers and to investigate institutional policies and practices. A short video featuring comments from a number of law students with disabilities was also made to educate law schools and the public about the accommodation issues at stake.

The Rise of the Social-Political Model of Disablement

The accommodation of students with disabilities in Canadian law schools, and in post-secondary education generally, reflects larger shifts in the attitude of society toward people with disabilities. In the last thirty years, we have witnessed the increasingly widespread acceptance of the social-political model of disablement. Whereas traditionally the problems faced by people with disabilities were seen to stem from their physical impairment which rendered them inferior and second class citizens who were best dealt with through charity, there has been increased awareness on how physical and attitudinal barriers handicap people with disabilities. These barriers range from steps that impede access for wheelchair users to a failure to provide materials in alternative formats for those with visual impairments or learning disabilities (sometimes referred to collectively as people with print disabilities) to a lack of sign language interpretation. Therefore, advocates of the social-political model of disablement, such as Oliver, Morris and Bickenbach^{^[iii]}, seek to shift the focus from the individual impairment of the person with a disability to the failure of society to remove barriers and thereby empower people with disabilities. In so doing, they hope to ameliorate the discriminatory treatment people with disabilities continue to experience in all aspects of social life from employment to poverty rates to levels of education.

An important turning point in the disability rights movement was the emergence of the Independent Living (IL) movement in the late 1960s. This movement, started originally by a group of activist university students with disabilities known as the Rolling Quads in Berkeley, California, saw people with disabilities as consumers entitled to equal treatment that were unfairly discriminated against by the structural barriers in all spheres of social life from the workplace to education to housing to even recreational activities^{^[iv]}. Out of this wave of creativity developed Independent Living Centres that sought to empower people with disabilities through advocacy, self-help and counselling. Within a few years, hundreds of centres were in place across the United States and Canada, as well as other countries such as Brazil and Britain^{^[v]}. In 1975, the Coalition of Provincial Organizations of the Handicapped (COPOH) (since renamed Council of Canadians with Disabilities), was founded as an umbrella organization of disability rights activists seeking to promote the equality of people with disabilities through the IL/consumer empowerment model^{^[vi]}.

The designation of 1981 as the International Year of Disabled Persons also raised awareness of the marginalization of people with disabilities and served as the impetus for grassroots activism on the issues at stake. For example, the founding of the National Educational Association of Disabled Students (NEADS) in 1986, in part inspired by the International Year of Disabled Persons, marked an important step forward for Canadian students with disabilities. Originally spawned by a group of Carleton University students with disabilities in Ottawa, NEADS has become a vital advocacy group for post-secondary students with disabilities, producing valuable research studies and bringing together students with disabilities at bi-annual conferences^{^[vii]}.

In the Canadian context, an equally important development was the adoption of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms as part of the repatriation of the constitution. Section 15 of the Charter, which came into effect in 1985, guarantees equality rights to people with disabilities, making Canada one of the few countries to guarantee equality rights to people with disabilities in its constitution. It can be argued that while the adoption of the Charter may have led to few concrete measures to eradicate barriers affecting people with disabilities, the Charter nevertheless drew attention to the systemic discrimination experienced by disabled people. By increasing the importance of individual legal rights and resolving disputes through legal action in the traditionally deferential Canadian political system, the Charter has fostered an environment where equality rights claims may more easily be made^{^[viii]}.

All these variables have led to greater attention on the accommodation of students with disabilities in Canadian post-secondary education. Yet the numbers of law school students and lawyers with disabilities to date remain relatively small. This underscores the importance of the research undertaken by Reach on the experiences of law school students with disabilities. It should be stressed that while advocates of the social-political model of disablement promote the inclusion of students with disabilities in all fields and disciplines, the legalization of disability rights through the social-political model itself is grounds for the placing of particular emphasis on accommodations in law schools. For example, the Supreme Court in recent years has started to consider issues of vital importance to people with disabilities including the most appropriate setting to educate children with disabilities^{^[x]}, the rights of deaf people to sign language interpretation during medical treatment in hospitals^{^[xi]}, and the appropriate sentence when a parent murders his or her disabled child^{^[xii]}. In each case, organizations representing people with disabilities successfully obtained intervener status. Moreover, provincial and federal human rights tribunals are increasingly dealing with disability rights cases as the number of such cases has escalated dramatically in the last few years. Labour relations boards and arbitration panels also regularly consider arguments related to disability discrimination. Lawyers with disabilities consequently have a crucial role to play in promoting disability rights and the social-political model of disablement as courts and administrative boards evaluate some of the most important issues of concern to people with disabilities^{^[xiii]}.

Admission to Law School

It should hardly be surprising that admission to Canadian law schools is highly competitive. However, it is very clear that there is no universal standard as each law school determines its own admission guidelines, although in Ontario, a central agency, the Ontario Law School Application Service, has been created to process applications to any of the province’s six law schools. Many law schools offer “equity” categories of admission which often include candidates with disabilities, although it of course varies from school to school^{^[xiv]}. It is submitted that such programs are very important, especially when a lack of accommodations at the undergraduate level may have adversely impacted on a candidate’s performance. However, such programs necessarily require the disclosure of a disability. For candidates with invisible disabilities, disclosure may be especially problematic and is ultimately a very personal decision.

Another important dimension with respect to admission is the role of part-time studies. For many students with disabilities, as well as other equity seeking groups such as single mothers, the ability to study part-time may be essential to success at law school and may be regarded as a key form of accommodation. One disadvantage is there may be limits on the number of places for part-time studies. As well, the overall costs of obtaining a law degree may increase markedly as a part-time program requires many more years of study^{^[xv]}.

One innovative suggestion raised at a focus group session was the implementation of a specialized pre-law program for students with disabilities interested in pursuing a career in law. Such a program already exists for Aboriginal students in Saskatchewan. Students would then get a sense of expectations in law school and be able to evaluate different types of accommodations in advance. Students could also learn basic skills such as how to brief cases, the crucial method

of preparing concise summaries that is essential to survive law school. Acceptance at law schools could be linked to successful completion of the pre-law program^{^[xvi]}.

The Law School Admission Test (LSAT)

The Law School Admission Test (LSAT) is a crucial component of gaining admission to law schools outside Quebec, although the precise weight it is given varies from law school to law school. It is intended to assess candidates’ suitability for the legal profession. However, the validity of the test has been hotly contested for a variety of reasons including allegations of cultural bias and irrelevance^{^[xvii]}. The project’s research found that many students with disabilities had serious problems with the way the Law School Admission Council (LSAC) provided accommodations to students with disabilities, notwithstanding LSAC’s professed commitment to the principles of reasonable accommodation. Some felt that inadequate provision of reasonable accommodations contributed to a weaker performance on the LSAT, which in turn might restrict a candidate’s choice of law schools ^{^[xviii]}. Others felt that they were forced to prove their disability, especially those with invisible disabilities such as Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) and chronic fatigue. LSAC treats some disabilities more restrictively than others, leading to the denial of accommodation of some students with disabilities. In fact, in the United States, both students with disabilities and the Justice Department have filed litigation alleging that LSAC wrongly denied accommodations. The disabilities in question ranged from learning disabilities to cerebral palsy to rheumatoid arthritis^{^[xix]}.

As law schools often have a somewhat separate identity from the university at which they are based, students with disabilities generally must deal with both a central office that assists students with disabilities with accommodations as well as staff at the law school itself. Our survey found that respondents felt that this can sometimes lead to difficulties with coordination and communication between the various staff in question^{^[xxii]}. It is regrettable that David Lepofsky’s suggestion that law students with disabilities have access to one office at the law school that could easily coordinate the essential services has in practice not been implemented^{^[xxiii]}. Most law schools have a designated staff representative who is a contact person, such as a professor, for students with disabilities, while at a few law schools, such as the University of Ottawa, there is a full-time equity officer who provides advice to students from equity-seeking groups, including students with disabilities. It would appear that students were generally pleased with the performance of these more specialized staff and that the introduction of such specialized personnel at other schools would be a step forward^{^[xxiv]}. One important finding of the Reach study was some respondents felt that providers of disability services did not take a sufficiently pro-active role in the crucial Orientation Week at the commencement of the academic year. Moreover, materials distributed at Orientation Week have not always been made available in alternative formats and attendant care services and accessible transportation options may not be available^{^[xxv]}.

The role of law school professors is another important factor in evaluating the administration of accommodation policies. A majority of survey participants said that most law school faculty, as well as administration and staff, were sensitive to their needs and made efforts to accommodate them. In a few cases, both students and faculty members, however, reported that some faculty members expressed regressive attitudes towards accommodating students with disabilities^{^[xxvi]}. Unfortunately, some still regard academic accommodations as lowering standards or favouritism. This is especially the case for students with invisible disabilities such as learning disabilities. Some professors apparently have also objected to the taping of lectures^{^[xxvii]}. The question therefore arises as to whether students should seek to involve professors in the accommodation process. However, in most cases, it would appear more appropriate to include professors in discussions on the accommodation process unless the student has an invisible disability and does not wish to self-identify or the student requires strictly examination accommodations that can be obtained without the professor’s knowledge^{^[xxviii]}. It should be noted, however, that faculty offices are not universally accessible to students with mobility impairments. In such cases, students can usually arrange to meet professors elsewhere on campus or consult with them by e-mail^{^[xxix]}.

A related issue is the evaluation of professors. All law schools are given an annual opportunity to evaluate courses and instructors on a confidential basis. Faculty may then generally review the evaluations in order to make improvements to the course. There were, however, cases reported by respondents where course evaluations were not available in alternative formats. It may also be the case that a professor could identify the author of comments raising concerns about disability accommodations^{^[xxx]}.

Classroom Accommodations

For many students with disabilities, there may be a need for accommodations during classroom instruction. They may include note takers, sign language interpreters or the use of a specialized computer during the lecture. There are also a large number of adaptive technologies that may assist some students with disabilities. Two valuable sources of information on adaptive technologies are the Adaptech Project based at Dawson College in Montreal and the Special Readers’ Programme of Queen’s University Libraries in Kingston, Ontario^{^[xxxi]}. In some cases, a modification of the professor’s teaching method may facilitate a student’s accommodation requirements. For instance, lecturers can learn to avoid speaking too quickly or “speaking to the board” with their backs turned away from the class. Another step that may be appropriate in some cases is providing students with disabilities with timely copies of overhead slides. As well, classrooms obviously need to be wheelchair accessible and have appropriate seating arrangements. Adequate lighting, acoustics and ventilation are also important considerations^{^[xxxii]}.

Students with a variety of disabilities may benefit from a note taking service. This is generally provided at no cost by the university disabled students’ service office. However, the exact process of obtaining a note taker varies from school to school. Respondents indicated that in some cases, students were expected to identify a volunteer themselves or else ask the professor to make an announcement to the class. In a highly competitive situation like law school, this could place students requiring accommodations in an awkward and/or embarrassing position^{^[xxxiii]}. Another commonly requested accommodation is the recording of lectures via audiotape. Some universities impose certain requirements such as continued attendance and a guarantee that the tapes will not be released to any other party. However, respondents indicated that some professors nevertheless object to audio taping, potentially compromising the accommodation of students’ needs^{^[xxxiv]}.

Another important component of law school education are tutorials for first year students. At the University of Ottawa’s Faculty of Common Law, the Education Equity Program offers tutorials, taught by upper year students with a record of strong academic performance, to help all first year students with the often enormous transition to legal studies. Law schools may also offer a “mentoring” program to match first year students with a “buddy” in the upper years. Respondents indicated, however, that students primarily rely on an informal study group comprised of peers and friends^{^[xxxv]}.

One class that may pose particular barriers for students with disabilities is the Moot Court program, a compulsory class at many law schools. Students are required to prepare a factum, a concise summary of the relevant facts and legal issues of a prescribed case, and present oral arguments concerning the case before a judge. Sometimes the judge is an actual member of the judiciary but the role may also be played by a student, faculty member or lawyer. Some of the disability accommodation issues that may arise include a lack of wheelchair access at Moot Court rooms in some law schools, attitudinal barriers by more traditional judges when faced with students with speech or hearing impairments, and procedural rules requiring counsel to stand while responding to questions from the judge. The enormous preparation time required for Moots may put some students with disabilities at a disadvantage. Consulting with the faculty member in charge of the Moot Program in advance may be one route to circumventing physical and attitudinal barriers^{^[xxxvi]}. Some schools, such as McGill Law School, are cognizant of the barriers and are undertaking renovations to make their Moot Classrooms wheelchair accessible.

Accommodations related to Access to Text Books and Case Books

For students with visual impairments or learning disabilities who require materials in alternative formats in a timely manner, the law school experience presents particularly daunting challenges. This reflects in part the large volume of readings assigned in law schools. Another factor is the reality that at some law schools, many sessional lecturers are hired only shortly before the commencement of the semester. In other cases, professors simply ignore loosely enforced requirements that they finalize their reading lists several months before the beginning of the academic year. The result is students with print disabilities often must wait a considerable length of time before materials are available in alternative formats since scanning materials accurately is frequently a time consuming and tedious task^{^[xxxvii]}. Focus group participants in every city identified this as a problem. Unfortunately, there does not appear to be an easy solution to this problem beyond making law school administrators and faculty aware of the great importance of having course materials identified as early as possible. One suggestion that might serve as a temporary if very imperfect measure is asking professors to identify the most essential portions of texts^{^[xxxviii]}. The use of Quicklaw, the on-line electronic system that is free for law students, may also help alleviate the worst aspects of this problem.

Accommodations at Law Libraries

One basic barrier that arises in the case of law school libraries is the frequent lack of physical access. Many law libraries are housed in either ancient historic buildings or merely badly designed newer buildings. In both cases, there may be considerable barriers to wheelchair users and others with mobility impairments. For instance, at one law school, wheelchair access after 6 PM is only available if the student phones in advance. At another law school, the reluctance on the part of the administration to entrust students with disabilities with the elevator keys for security reasons impedes the independence of students with disabilities. In fact, reliance on buzzers and keys to reach accessible entrance is a common feature of law libraries. Furthermore, materials are frequently stored on high shelves and narrow stacks, making the books very inaccessible to wheelchair users even if they overcome the barriers to enter the building in the first place^{^[xxxix]}. Desks and tables in computer labs often found in law libraries are not always wheelchair accessible. One respondent suggested that some of the desks and tables ought to be electronically adjustable so that they could be adapted to various wheelchair heights^{^[xl]}.

Services for students with visual impairments or learning disabilities are also compromised by the general lack of library materials in alternative formats such as audiotape, large print and Braille and the relative difficulty in transforming materials into accessible formats. This is especially problematic as many law schools have a mandatory research essay requirement and a student may find that his or her grade suffers because of this shortage of accessible materials. While most libraries offer adaptive equipment such as specialized computers, print enlargers and dictating systems, demand may sometimes outweigh supply. One survey respondent noted that he was in fact prohibited from using his own voice dictation system while in the library^{^[xli]}. Furthermore, computer services specialists and library personnel do not always ensure that the software programs available to students in general are accessible to students with visual impairments or learning disabilities. This is an increasingly critical issue as on-line research becomes an essential tool for students in general^{^[xlii]}. The same security concerns that restrict the distribution of keys to students with mobility impairments also create barriers for students with visual impairments or learning disabilities in some cases. Respondents noted the reluctance of allowing reserve books to leave the library even briefly in order to be scanned, an essential process to make the text available in alternative formats^{^[xliii]}.

It should be noted, in fairness, that most survey respondents found that library staff are normally very accommodating. For the most part, they readily will help students with disabilities to locate, retrieve and photocopy materials, as well as provide reference assistance. However, staff assistance involving disability accommodation often requires advance notice which can be extremely frustrating given the heavy work load of law students with disabilities. The comprehensive browsing that law students are accustomed to, however, may be difficult to obtain when relying on staff to retrieve books. With the expansion of the internet, however, students are increasingly able to do research from their own homes in what is likely an accessible format, an enormous advantage for students with learning disabilities, mobility impairments and visual impairments^{^[xliv]}.

Brief mention should be made of the Online Library Information System (OLLIS), founded by a few law students at the University of Ottawa in the mid-1990s. In 1999, the administration of OLLIS was transferred to the Centre for Special Services, the University of Ottawa’s disabled students’ service office. It provides, in cooperation with a number of law schools and legal text publishers, access to a database of legal textbooks, casebooks and other materials in a variety of alternative formats that could prove invaluable to students with print disabilities. It is free for any student or other person who has medical documentation of a print disability. The staff at the Centre for Special Services carries out the arduous task of converting an electronic or scanned print copy into an accessible format that is free of errors such as computer and style codes^{^[xlv]}.

Examination Accommodations

Perhaps both the most dreaded and most important component of the law school experience, it is imperative that students with disabilities have access to appropriate exam accommodations in order to obtain genuine equal opportunity while in law school. Unlike other segments of the job market, articling opportunities, the mandatory work period following law school graduation before a candidate is entitled to write Bar examinations, are determined to a large extent by first and second year law school grades. At most law schools, the grounds for requesting examination accommodation are not narrowly defined but are considered on a case-by-case basis. In most cases, accommodations requested on the basis of any physical, mental or learning disability, as well as illness or medical condition, will be considered. In some cases, there may be an informal or official appeal process whereby students may challenge adverse decisions^{^[xlvi]}.

In general, students must supply documentation regarding their disability in order to obtain examination accommodations. Submission of documents in a timely manner is imperative to ensure that accommodations may be implemented on schedule. In the case of certain disabilities such as learning disabilities, more detailed documentation such as professional assessments may be required, at the student’s expense. Students may be also required to register with the university’s disabled students’ service office and, depending on the accommodation, are often expected to discuss the matter with the professor concerned and the law school official who has been given the portfolio of disability accommodation issues^{^[xlvii]}.

Survey results indicated that nearly all respondents were aware that they could request examination accommodations. In most cases, the survey indicated that students who did request accommodations, the majority, had little difficulty in having their examinations accommodated in a manner that balanced respecting the testing process with the student’s needs. Some examples of common accommodations include scheduling changes, additional time for writing the examination, special equipment, a separate room, the use of a computer, assistance of scribes, or an alternative format examination. In our sample, the most common accommodations were extra time or the use of a computer to facilitate typing the examination. No students reported that the examination was waived or that they were administered a different examination^{^[xlviii]}.

One major problem that was reported in our study relates to the preservation of anonymity with respect to examination accommodations. As law school grades may determine employment outcomes, at least in the early stages of a lawyer’s career, anonymity is an essential component of the law school experience, although policies on anonymity vary from law school to law school. This includes both the anonymity of the candidate’s actual identity and, in some cases where the professor was not involved with establishing accommodations, the fact that the examination was written under accommodated conditions. Breaches of anonymity may occur in a variety of ways. For instance, in the case of sessional lecturers, who make up a significant proportion of faculty at many law schools, examinations written under accommodated conditions may arrive later than regular examinations. Code numbering systems for large print or other accommodated exams sometimes inadvertently betray the fact that an exam was written under accommodated conditions. If only a single examination is typed, it may be relatively easy for professors to determine the identity of the candidate^{^[xlix]}.

Educational and Social Opportunities Outside the Classroom

Participation in extra-curricular activities, especially student legal aid clinics, are a vital part of the law school experience and play a pivotal role in facilitating the networking that may lead to articling and other career opportunities. Survey results indicate that many students with disabilities did not participate in extra-curricular activities because of the demanding nature of law school course requirements. Limited attendant care, highly restrictive transportation systems and pure fatigue may also restrict the ability of students with disabilities to participate as much as they would prefer. Furthermore, some student lounges are not adequately accessible, limiting the ability of students with disabilities to even learn about many extra-curricular activities and fully interact with their peers in less formal settings^{^[l]}.

Student legal aid clinics are especially important institutions that make participants more marketable to articling employers. Not only are students providing services to some of the most disenfranchised members of the community, often including people with disabilities, they are gaining valuable skills that are not taught in law school and yet are essential for articling and practice as a lawyer. Unfortunately, legal clinics may not always be accessible to students with disabilities. Ironically, given the potential clients with disabilities, not all legal clinics are even necessarily wheelchair accessible. In other cases, respondents noted that their print disabilities were not accommodated as the clinic files were not available in an accessible format^{^[li]}.

Other important extra-curricular activities include optional competitive mooting and participation in law journals. In the case of mooting, generally consisting of teams of the law school’s best students as selected by faculty members, the structure of the competition may impose barriers for students with print disabilities or hearing impairments. The travel to other cities may impose hardship for students with mobility impairments. In the case of law journals, the very limited budgets of these publications may make the provision of print materials in alternative formats very difficult^{^[lii]}.

Students’ Associations are another opportunity for students to participate in a law school’s social life. They usually have mandatory membership fees and organize extracurricular social, recreational and athletic activities. Some may be involved with the broader provincial and national student organizations such as the Canadian Federation of Students. In certain cases, there may be associations of law students with disabilities, just as there are often caucuses for women or gays and lesbians. They, however, are relatively uncommon. The Students’ Association may provide some services, such as counselling or career placement services. In a small number of schools, such as at York University, they may even support a disabled students’ group. At McGill Law School, there is a small group for law students with disabilities and the constitution of the Law Students’ Association requires that the equity rights of students with disabilities be taken into account^{^[liii]}. Another important organization is the Canadian Association of Visually Impaired Lawyers (CAVIL). It includes law students with visual impairments^{^[liv]}.

Financing for Law School and Other Expenses

Funding is an issue of great importance to students with disabilities. Law school is by no means inexpensive, ranging from $2,500 to $6,600 per year, and is likely to increase in the future. There are obviously significant additional costs such as living expenses, books, photocopying and incidental costs. For students with disabilities, however, there may be additional expenses such as transportation costs, attendant care and medical expenses. They may not be covered by either government financial assistance programs or by university or community disability service providers. Furthermore, students with disabilities may simply be unable to take on part-time work during the academic year, consequently limiting their income. It is therefore imperative that students with disabilities begin the search for loans, grants or scholarships as early as possible.

The financial services office of each university a candidate is interested in is a good starting point. Another important source of information is the National Directory of Financial Assistance Programs for Post-Secondary Students with Disabilities, published by NEADS in March, 2000. This text is available on-line at http://www.neads.ca/norc/funding/contents.html^{^[lv]}

Survey respondents indicated that they were not sufficiently informed of potential assistance prior to law school. Such assistance clearly would have made a difference in the quality of their experience as they paid for their own assistants, tutors and for the recording of textbooks^{^[lvi]}. In particular, respondents commented that they were not aware of the availability of Canada Study Grants, in amounts of up to $5,000 for each year of study, to qualified full-time and part-time students with permanent disabilities. Grants are particularly advantageous because, unlike loans, they do not have to be paid back. The grant is intended to cover exceptional education-related expenses such as attendant care, transportation, tutors or specialized equipment. Part-time students with disabilities who demonstrate high financial need may be eligible for an additional grant of up to $1,200 per year and one may apply for both a disability-related grant and a severe financial need grant. Furthermore, information about financial assistance is not always available in alternate formats^{^[lvii]}.

Under the auspices of Human Resources Development Canada, the federal government provides loans to qualified post-secondary students who demonstrate financial need. Each province also has a student assistance program. Applicants must demonstrate that their financial requirements for attendance at law school exceed their means. Government loans may not be as preferable as grants but are nevertheless preferable to private institutional loans as the interest rate is lower and there is greater flexibility regarding repayment. Under the Canada Student Loan Program, interest need not be paid on the loan nor payments made towards the principal while the student is enrolled in full-time studies. There are relaxed eligibility criteria for full-time student status in the case of students with disabilities. Moreover, in the case of permanent disabilities, loans may be forgiven if the repayment would cause difficulty because of problems associated with obtaining full-time employment after graduation. Otherwise, re-payment of federal loans must commence six months after the conclusion of studies and defaulting on the debt can have very serious consequences. NEADS is a member of the National Advisory Group on Student Financial Assistance, one of three groups that make up stakeholders concerned with this issue^{^[lviii]}.

Another option is scholarships or bursaries. They are generally awarded on the basis of need or merit. They may also be awarded on the basis of membership in a disadvantaged group, including people with disabilities. One barrier, however, is that it is often difficult to learn about these scholarships. Respondents indicated that had they been aware of these potential scholarships, they would have taken advantage of the opportunities. Some valuable sources of information include financial aid offices at both law schools and the university in general, the internet, the recent NEADS publication, and the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada^{^[lix]}.

Finally, provincial social assistance programs are an option for students with disabilities. However, in recent years, severe cutbacks have had a negative impact on the availability and quality of these programs. There are also generally residency requirements that would greatly restrict eligible candidates. The monthly amount provided is generally quite minimal but often includes medical coverage such as dental care, prescription medications, eye glasses, and assistive devices such as wheelchairs and hearing aids. If a technological aid is needed for educational purposes, students with disabilities may qualify for additional assistance. One problem, however, is that not all disabilities are necessarily approved for government assistance^{^[lx]}. As in the case of other funding routes, students must take the time to apply and closely follow the bureaucratic procedures.

Conclusions

Students with disabilities clearly face significant barriers in all aspects of legal education from the admission process to classroom accommodations to exam accommodations. Nevertheless, it is clear that Canadian law schools have advanced significantly in their awareness of disability rights. Institutional policies are in force at all Canadian law schools and progressive admission equity programs have resulted in the admission of many students with disabilities. One broad conclusion that is clear from the survey responses and focus groups is the crucial need for students to self-advocate vigorously. Students must take time to plan strategies in advance to obtain needed accommodations. One bright sign is the majority of respondents would recommend law school as a choice for future students with disabilities. It is this future generation that will have to continue the quest for accommodations and equality rights for disabled law students.

Appendix One

List of Disabilities that may require Accommodations^{^[lxi]}

• Deafness or hearing loss

• Blindness or visual impairment

• Learning and cognitive disabilities

• Acquired brain injuries

• Mobility impairments

• Functional or fine motor impairments

• Chronic Health conditions

• Psychiatric or mental disorders

• Temporary disabilities

• Multiple disabilities

Appendix Two

List of Common Services and Accommodations by Disability^{^[lxii]}

Deafness/Hearing Impairment

Services

• Note taking

• Computerized note taking

• Special arrangements for assignments and examinations

• Tutoring

• Sign language interpretation

Equipment and Facilities

• FM systems

• Telecommunications device (TTY) and Pay Phone TTYs

• Flashing indicators in campus residences

• Specialized computer software

• Portable computer

• Study room

Mobility Impairments

Services

• Note taking

• Scribe

• Library research assistance

• Special arrangements for examinations and assignments

• Campus escort

Equipment and Facilities

• Wheelchairs

• Portable ramps

• Specialized computer software

• Study room

• Computer assistance

Blindness and Visual Disabilities

Services

• Note taking

• Scribe

• Library research assistance

• Special arrangements for examinations and assignments

• Campus escort

Equipment and Facilities

• Braille texts and materials

• Books and materials on audiotape or in large print

• Tape recorders

• Specialized computer software

• Specialized computer hardware (such as large screen monitors)

• Speech synthesizers and voice dictation

• Publication scanner

Learning Disabilities

Services

• Note taking

• Library research assistance

• Special accommodation for examinations and assignments

• Campus escort

• Scribe

• Tutoring

Equipment and Facilities

• Specialized computer software

• Tape recorders

• Audiotape books

[i]. Sandra A. Goundry and Yvonne Peters, A Framework for Action: Law Schools, Education Equity and Students with Disabilities (Ottawa: Reach, 1998).

[ii]. Allan McChesney, ed. Navigating Law School and Beyond: A Practical Guide for Students Who Have Disabilities (Ottawa, Reach, 2000).

[iii]. Michael Oliver, The Politics of Disablement (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1990), Jenny Morris, Pride against Prejudice: Transforming Attitudes to Disability (London: The Women’s Press, 1991), and Jerome E. Bickenbach, Physical Disability and Social Policy (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1993).

[iv]. Joseph P. Shapiro, No Pity: People with Disabilities Forging A New Civil Rights Movement (New York: Times Books, 1993), 47-53.

[v]. James I. Charlton, Nothing About Us Without Us: Disability Oppression and Empowerment (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998), 134-136.

[vi]. Bickenbach, 150.

[vii]. See Emer Killean and David Hubka, Working Towards A Coordinated National Approach to Services, Accommodations and Policies for Students with Disabilities: Ensuring Access to Higher Education and Career Training (Ottawa: NEADS, 1999). See also the valuable web site at www.neads.ca, accessed on May 6, 2001.

[viii]. See, for instance, Gerald-A. Beaudoin and Ed Ratushny, The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms 2^nd ed. (Toronto: Carswell, 1989).

[ix]. McChesney, viii. See also Michael Lynk, “The Duty to Accommodate in the Canadian Workforce,” in Conference Proceedings of the Centre for Labour-Management Development January 2001 Conference (Winnipeg: Centre for Labour-Management Development, January 2001), 1-75 for a discussion of the duty to accommodate in the employment context.

[x]. Eaton v. Brant County Board of Education, [1997] 1 S.C.R. 241.

[xi]. Eldridge v. British Columbia (Attorney General), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 624.

[xii]. R. v. Latimer, 2001 SCC 1.

[xiii]. See Lynk, 1-75 for an excellent discussion of disability and the duty to accommodate as the issue arises in arbitration boards.

[xiv]. McChesney, 7.

[xv]. McChesney, 9.

[xvi]. McChesney, 8.

[xvii]. Dawna Tong and W. Wesley Pue, “The Best and the Brightest? Canadian Law School Admissions”(1999), 37 Osgoode Hall Law Journal 843.

[xviii]. McChesney, 14.

[xix]. McChesney, 16-17.

[xx]. McChesney, 16.

[xxi]. McChesney, 17.

[xxii]. McChesney, 19.

[xxiii]. David Lepofsky, “Disabled Persons in Canadian Law Schools” (1991), 36 McGill Law Review 636, at 640.

[xxiv]. McChesney, 19.

[xxv]. McChesney, 26.

[xxvi]. McChesney, 24. See also Lepofsky, 636, at 639.

[xxvii]. McChesney, 24.

[xxviii]. McChesney, 25.

[xxix]. McChesney, 25-26.

[xxx]. McChesney, 26.

[xxxi]. McChesney, 31-32.

[xxxii]. McChesney, 29-32.

[xxxiii]. McChesney, 30-31.

[xxxiv]. McChesney, 31.

[xxxv]. McChesney, 32.

[xxxvi]. McChesney, 33.

[xxxvii]. McChesney, 36-37.

[xxxviii]. McChesney, 36-38.

[xxxix]. McChesney, 39.

[xl]. McChesney, 40.

[xli]. McChesney, 40.

[xlii]. McChesney, 40.

[xliii]. McChesney, 43.

[xliv]. McChesney, 40.

[xlv]. McChesney, 41.

[xlvi]. McChesney, 45.

[xlvii]. McChesney, 44-45.

[xlviii]. McChesney, 45-46.

[xlix]. McChesney, 46-47.

[l]. McChesney, 50.

[li]. McChesney, 50-51.

[lii]. McChesney, 51.

[liii]. McChesney, 52.

[liv]. McChesney, 54.

[lv]. McChesney, 71-72.

[lvi]. McChesney, 75.

[lvii]. McChesney, 72.

[lviii]. McChesney, 72-74.

[lix]. McChesney, 74.

[lx]. McChesney, 75.

[lxi]. McChesney, 21.

[lxii]. McChesney, 21-22.