I have a writing disability, due to the malfunction of of part of my body, being my hyper-extended right thumb. This could also be classified as a partial loss of a bodily function. My Writing Disability is not of recent origins, extending back to 1992, at the latest.

As with so much Disability Law, this is a matter of SPECIAL NEEDS. Section 6 Disability Discrimination Act 1992 is directed at the consideration of Special Needs resulting from Disability.

Section 6 DDA reads:

"Section 6 Indirect disability discrimination
                   For the purposes of this Act, a person (discriminator) discriminates against another person (aggrieved person) on the ground of a disability of the aggrieved person if the discriminator requires the aggrieved person [ie me - Russell Mathews] to comply with a requirement or condition [ie to not take my dogs with me inside many premises, or not use a camera to transcribe information]:
                     (a) with which a substantially higher proportion of persons without the disability comply or are able to comply; and
                     (b) which is not reasonable having regard to the circumstances of the case; and
                     (c) with which the aggrieved person does not or is not able to comply.

I will paraphrase Section 6, but to do that I need to also include for consideration Section 11 DDA which reads:

"Section 11 - Unjustifiable hardship

                   For the purposes of this Act, in determining what constitutes unjustifiable hardship, all relevant circumstances of the particular case are to be taken into account including:
                     (a) the nature of the benefit or detriment likely to accrue or be suffered by any persons concerned; and
                     (b) the effect of the disability of a person concerned; and
                     (c) the financial circumstances and the estimated amount of expenditure required to be made by the person claiming unjustifiable hardship; and
                     (d) in the case of the provision of services, or the making available of facilities—an action plan given to the Commission under section 64."

When a disabled person has SPECIAL NEEDS, persons and organisations responsive to the DDA are required to accommodate those special needs, unless they can make a case for not doing so. The "requirement or condition" mentioned could be for example that clients are required to use the stairs, or to not be accompanied by a dog, or to not use a camera to record information when permitted to take hand written notes. Sub-sections (a) and (c) have to do with identifying the "requirement or condition". Sub-section 6(b) and Section 11 relate to balancing whether the special need needs to be met.

The right to have special needs accommodated is a balancing consideration; balancing "all relevant circumstances" including the nature of any benefit of having the Special Needs met,; compared to the detriment of not having it met, the nature of the disability, and how that gives rise to the Special Needs. The reference in Section 11(c) to"amount of expenditure" is usually considered in relation to the provision of wheelchair-ramp access and the expenditure required for that purpose.

By the Commonwealth's Disability Discrimination Act 1992 [DDA], I have multiple disabilities. One of these is my writing disability. The DDA definition of Disability is included below. My writing disability due to my hyper-extended thumb, fits within both sub-sections (a) and (e) in that definition below. Refer to the Medical Report by Dr John Bennett, which report appears immediately below the DDA definition of Disability.

By Section 4 Interpretation: for definitions:

"disability, in relation to a person, means:
                     (a) total or partial loss of the person’s bodily or mental functions; or
                     (b) total or partial loss of a part of the body; or
                     (c) the presence in the body of organisms causing disease or illness; or
                     (d) the presence in the body of organisms capable of causing disease or illness; or
                     (e) the malfunction, malformation or disfigurement of a part of the person’s body; or
                      (f) a disorder or malfunction that results in the person learning differently from a person without the disorder or malfunction; or
                     (g) a disorder, illness or disease that affects a person’s thought processes, perception of reality, emotions or judgment or that results in disturbed behaviour;
and includes a disability that:
                     (h) presently exists; or
                      (i) previously existed but no longer exists; or
                      (j) may exist in the future; or
                     (k) is imputed to a person.

Medical Report, re writing disability, by Dr John Bennett.

I had problems with note taking in lectures from the time I began part time studies in 1991. Because of the malfunction of my right thumb, writing is not only painful for me, but, because I cannot move my fingers as desteriously, or make as finer movements with my thumb and fingers, my writing is next to illegible.

I tried all manner of aids to holding a pen, but without success. I eventually bought an old "portable" 8-bit computer but I had to sit near a power point in lectures. I upgraded to a keyboard with RAM memory which displayed three lines of type, and used 4 AA batteries. This adaptation to, and accomodation of, my writing disability has been a progressive exercise. While using the keyboard with RAM memory, each evening, I had to download the notes I had taken during the day. That was a labourous time consuming exercise. I then had to spend more time correcting spelling and making my notes sensible. This was a major exercise given my other disabilities, as I would be falling asleep as I tried to download my notes.

Initially, in 1991, for exams, I was given extra time as my writing was slow, painful and cumbersome. As my typing began to improve, it became worthwhile to try to type my answers, because I was given extra time to allow for my slow typing.   Typing is satisfactory for me to take notes or impart my knowledge in written form, provided I am given extra time.   However, I need longer than for writing as I type slowly. However, because of my brain injury disability causing my concentration problems, I was given rest breaks during my exams. Typing was my only option for taking notes or imparting my knowledge. However, typing is, for the above reasons, not appropriate for transcription.

Because of my brain damage disabilities, and my need for regular rest breaks, it take me longer to accomplish any task. Thus I have less time to achieve the tasks I must do.   Hence, efficiency for me is paramount.

Hence, in any situation where "transcription" is permitted, my only feasible method of transcription is to use my camera on the "close-up" setting.   In any situation, if transcription is permitted, but use of a camera is forbidden, it amounts to Indirect Disability Discrimination, as per Section 6 DDA, to prohibit my use of a camera to transcribe, as my use of a camera is the best means for me to alleviate the effect of my writing disability. This closely parrallels the situation of Indirect Disability Discrimination that exists with Assistance Dogs. Consider a place or premises where people may go but where they are prohibited from being accompanied by their dog. A disabled person who has an assistance dog has the right to enter that place or premises accompanied by their assistance dog. It matters not whether being accompanied by the assistance dog is the best method to alleviate the effects of that disability. It matters not that there may be alternatives to being accompanied by an assistance dog.   An alternative for a Blind person being accompaned by a guide dog, is to use a white cane, or any cane for that matter as they could not tell the colour.   A guide dog is not essential to enable a blind person to have mobility.   To investigate that matter in an individual case with a blind person, or any disabled person, amounts, by itself alone, to disability discrimination.

Similarily, in my situation with my writing disability, to challenge me for my use of a camera to transcribe information where transcription is permitted, [ie whether it is the best or only method, whereby I can alleviate the effects of my wrtiting disability], is disability discrimination.

I have suffered discrimination in this respect, on two occasions. One is with respect to transcribing or taking note of court cases [to which I was a party, but that is immaterial], from court documents where I was permitted to transcribe provided I used other than my camera. The registrar of the Supreme Court of Queensland [SCQ] quoted the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules [UCPR] at me as justification for that prohibition.    UCPR is subsidiary Queensland Legislation. That means it has less stature or status than State Statutes.

I have my right to use my camera to transcribe, by the DDA which is Commonwealth Legislation, and a Statute in fact. Section 109 of the Australian Constitution reads:

Section109 Inconsistency of laws
When a law of a State is inconsistent with a law of the Commonwealth, the latter shall prevail, and the former shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be invalid.

Hence, my right to use my camera to transcribe or take notes of court cases from cout files, is not adversely affected by the UCPR.   UCPR is a law of a state and the DDA is a law of the Commonwealth, and it prevails where it is inconsistent with the UCPR.

Another occasion occurred when I was perusing the Australian Electoral Roll, [AER] at the office of the Australian Electoral Commission [AEC], at 488 Queen Street, Brisbane. I, and all Autralian electors are entitled to transcribe an unlimited. amount of information from the AER. I was using my camera on the "close-up" setting to transcribe inforamation.   The AER must be open to public scrutiny to ensure its veracity.

I was told abusively by what I assumed were Commonwealth Public servants that I may not use my camera to transcribe.   I asked for that in writing at that time. They told me that it was "coming out of the printer", and that they were "onto Canberra", but still after half an hour, nothing was presented to me.   I advised them of my email address and the office manager recorded it. I asked that I be forwarded the information whereby they claimed justification for their discrimination against me, but to date, seven weeks later, nothing has arrived.

*****************************************

These being my Obstructive Sleep Apnoea [OSA], and, related to that and my concussion injury in 1967, my brain damage and clinically significant atrophy and my deformed skull and resulting disfigurement and gross ugliness. I am presently in receipt of the Disability Support Pension. I could not be entitled unless I was disabled. I hope to earn sufficient income such that I will be able to forego that pension at some time in the future, but I will still be diaabled. Psychology professionals advise me that although I am now overcoming some of my ill-health, I will always be disabled due to the permanent damage I have suffered.

So many parts of that definition apply to me. These being the brain damage and atrophy, [(a), (b), (f), (g), and (h)], and my deformed skull and resulting disfigurement and gross ugliness [(e) and (h)].

Now, that means I come under the provisions of the DDA. By Section 109 of the Australian Constitution which reads:

Section109 Inconsistency of laws
When a law of a State is inconsistent with a law of the Commonwealth, the latter shall prevail, and the former shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be invalid.

Hence, when a matter is provided for under the DDA, it matters not a skerrik that a State law may suggest an inconstency with the DDA. This means the DDA provides for my assistance DOGS [plural]. despite the Queensland Guide Dogs Act and the NSW Companion Animals Act.

BULLIES OUTED!

While writing this page I googled for a definition of BULLY or BULLYING, to find "most people only realise they're being bullied when they read this page",

The Bully Online website published by the UK National Workplace Bullying Advice Line. The site is extensive and detailed.

In time I will name all of the bullies and link them to specific pages on this site.

Some TACTICS and STRATEGIES of BULLYING.

The DYNAMICS of the BULLYING to which I am subjected, and the reasons for it.

For so long I did not realise that I was being bullied. I just realised I was being attacked often. Others had suggested that as I was the comon denominator, it must be something about me; something that I was doing. That seemed logical to me. I looked hard and long at myself to try to understand. [In fact it was DIRECTLY RELATED TO ME but was not of my volition AND was completely beyond my control: view my MRI. In my High School years, I was known as a brain. I was then very intelligent, especially with mathematics. I had come to the conclusion that it must be that I was causing others to be jealous of me. It was intimated that I should conceal my intelligence. I withdrew into myself. I was still bullied.

It is only recently, [2005] that I obtained that MRI to show the actual case, unequivocally.

There are TWO BASIC CAUSES OF THE BULLYING I SUSTAIN: They are not independent but are interrelated and correlated.

1.)   The asymmetry/freakishish-ugliness of my deformed skull and resulting disfigurement.
2.)   Most importantly, the consequences of 1. above:-
    a)   Shark attack whereby gutless parasites, see me as being an "easy target" for their bullying, as it make them feel superior to me.
    b)   My undeserved "reputation" or, in psychology speak, the 'halo effect' [similar to "where there's smoke there's fire"], which is a consequence of 1. and 2a. above. This is especially so when a third party has to make decision regarding me: for example, Public servant parasites in the Public Sector, and for Magistrates and Judges [where they are not already out and out corrupt - the case with many]. This is so even where they do not see me but just "read between the lines" on my reputation and the demonisation of me, by other bullies.

Research shows that Ugly people are so much more harshly treated by courts, much the same as with Aborigines. Aborigines are bullied, just for being Aborigines. The discrimination I suffer is very similar to Racial discrimination. Hence, I readily appreciate how Aborigines, and people of PNG and Solomon Islands experience Racial discrimination [simply bullying].

Morgan
Anglican Church
Hughie
The University of Queensland [UQ]
     UQ's Registrar, Douglas Porter
     UQ's Vice Chancellor, Prof John Hay
Brisbane City Council [BCC] Corruption, breaking, entering and stealing, illegal imprisonment, CRUELTY TO ANIMALS.
    Garth Steven Donnelly, cheater, nominally employed by BCC. Should he be in jail for PERJURY? You decide. Why did he PANIC?.
     Is Gaylene Vivian another LIAR at BCC?
    The EVIDENCE that the Queensland Information Commissions states that the SOLICITOR for BCC is a LIAR.

Some TACTICS and STRATEGIES of BULLYING
Bullying involves demonisation of the target with lies of evil, wrongdoing or immoral conduct. When challenged, the bully cannot substantiate his allegations but may say that the person who can deliver the evidence is afraid of repercussions from the bullied target [helps to substantiate the lie], that the target was challenged [in private but was not challenged, or was challenged, because the bully had included that, planning his bullying, as a way of substantiating the lie that the conduct occurred, when the target admits that he was challenged], and that the challenge was worthwhile because the target no longer engages in that conduct. [I am pleased you don't beat your wife now.]

There is much CORRUPTION in Australia but the majority of it is concealed. THIS HAS MAJOR CONSEQUENCES FOR AUSTRALIA POLICICALLY ON the WORLD STAGE. Australia attempts to pontificate from the HIGH MORAL GROUND and be the “BULLY OF THE PACIFIC”. America [USA – Bush] is attempting to diminish its INTERNATIONAL crimes by seeming to associate with a densizen of the “high moral ground” [Australia], whereas in fact, AUSTRALIA IS RIFE WITH CORRUPTION. The hidden corruption is spread across layers of government, [elected and “public service”], POLICE, [Queensland and Federal], the judiciary, legal profession, EDUCATION, UNIVERSITIES and business. It occurs in many dimensions. Much of the corruption is for the “cover-up” of incompetence, and other corruption. Some members of my “family” have gained some “inspiration” from some of this corruption, utilising corruption in the legal profession and judiciary.
The www is the ideal medium to present The EVIDENCE of this corruption when that evidence is documented and the statements of others where those statements are public records. I WILL PUBLISH THE FACTUAL EVIDENCE HERE. My purpose with this site is to assemble that evidence and the logical linkage for the UNCHALLENGABLE CONCLUSION. I have special skills in this respect. I am first and foremost a MATHEMATICIAN with maths majors in my BSc and BA. As well, I am fully trained to be admitted as a lawyer. I have practical experience in many courts over many years and as an accountant and tax agent.

Quick Access

Who is "HAIG"?
HAIG concerns:
Contents/Sitemap SEARCH this site
Opt-In Emails/ SIGN UP.
Contact HAIG
The "Judges are Corrupt" [WorldWide] Network
Tertiary Education in Australia Recycling to save the Earth Water stupidity in Australia.
English as a Second Language for Chinese.
Interests for Chinese People
Coaching/Consulting

By Section 4 Interpretation: for definitions:

So many parts of that definition apply to me. These being the brain damage and atrophy, [(a), (b), (f), (g), and (h)], and my deformed skull and resulting disfigurement and gross ugliness [(e) and (h)].

hhhhh

I am disabled according to the law.

[go to HAIG REPORT home frames]
By the Commonwealth's Disability Discrimination Act 1992 [DDA], I have multiple disabilities. These being my Obstructive Sleep Apnoea [OSA], and, related to that and my concussion injury in 1967, my brain damage and clinically significant atrophy and my deformed skull and resulting disfigurement and gross ugliness. I am presently in receipt of the Disability Support Pension. I could not be entitled unless I was disabled. I hope to earn sufficient income such that I will be able to forego that pension at some time in the future, but I will still be diaabled. Psychology professionals advise me that although I am now overcoming some of my ill-health, I will always be disabled due to the permanent damage I have suffered.

By Section 4 Interpretation: for definitions:
"disability, in relation to a person, means:
                     (a) total or partial loss of the person’s bodily or mental functions; or
                     (b) total or partial loss of a part of the body; or
                     (c) the presence in the body of organisms causing disease or illness; or
                     (d) the presence in the body of organisms capable of causing disease or illness; or
                     (e) the malfunction, malformation or disfigurement of a part of the person’s body; or
                      (f) a disorder or malfunction that results in the person learning differently from a person without the disorder or malfunction; or
                     (g) a disorder, illness or disease that affects a person’s thought processes, perception of reality, emotions or judgment or that results in disturbed behaviour;
and includes a disability that:
                     (h) presently exists; or
                      (i) previously existed but no longer exists; or
                      (j) may exist in the future; or
                     (k) is imputed to a person.
So many parts of that definition apply to me. These being the brain damage and atrophy, [(a), (b), (f), (g), and (h)], and my deformed skull and resulting disfigurement and gross ugliness [(e) and (h)].

Now, that means I come under the provisions of the DDA. By Section 109 of the Australian Constitution which reads:
["Section109 Inconsistency of laws

When a law of a State is inconsistent with a law of the Commonwealth, the latter shall prevail, and the former shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be invalid."],
when a matter is provided for under the DDA, it matters not a skerrik that a State law may suggest an inconstency with the DDA. This means the DDA provides for my assistance DOGS [plural]. despite the Queensland Guide Dogs Act and the NSW Companion Animals Act.

[go to HAIG REPORT home frames]