lørdag den 25. oktober 2014

For review in cases concerning the placement of children. By Hanne Ziebe, lawyer #fostercare #denmark #gifted #odense


Dansk: http://2e-giftedogdiagnose.blogspot.dk/2014/10/om-prvelse-i-sager-om-anbringelse-af.html
For review
in cases concerning the placement of children.

By Hanne Ziebe, lawyer

Practice on the placement:

A judge in a municipality in southern Jutland said recently during a meeting in the municipal child and youth committee: "It is very unsatisfactory that the lawyer and we have not received the file. But now, we strongly recommend that the municipality remember to send the file to the next meeting when the matter to be reviewed in two years. "With these words, the little boy preventive detention for two years.

Other examples from my practice from September 2014:

Holstebro Municipality chose to place some children, first in relation to the mother, and a month later the father could come in and have tried his case. Here it was decided that the children should also be placed in relationship with him.
Father's case was thus virtually determined one month before he came to the meeting and did not have a feeling that he could have tried his case, that was the decision on the placement of children in the mother's case. In this case, in this way come to affix the parents instead of the kids, and the case now has two genbehandlingsfrister in relation to the children.

In Odense Municipality was not considered a problem that a councilor who had to approve a decision to place a child, had a even a very clear position on the mother. (red. Mother of a Gifted Child, misplaced by foster care!)
After the mother was questioned at the meeting, and the lawyers had made their concluding remarks, traveled council member stood up and said addressed to my client, "I'm good enough tired of you." He referred on to a long series of telephone and e-mail correspondence, which he for some time before the meeting had had with her ​​mother. After a few minute monologue he was stopped by the referee. The mother was then a waiting room, so the committee could decide. The referee announced shortly after the committee had unanimously decided to forcibly remove the child. The mother did not have an experience of having had a fair review of the placement of her son. Firstly, because one of its voting members had openly declared that he did not like my client. Secondly, because he took the last word in the matter and procederede against my client and they had a platform to influence the other members. The judge denied that that was disqualified during the proceedings.

The last case I want to mention is a case from a central Jutland municipality. Here are a young couple struggling to get in touch with the municipality to municipality to hand over their children back. The municipality was granted to place the children in a year, and the year has passed. There has not taken any decisions or agreements that may legalize the placement of the children. Parents have been told that the social worker has been on vacation and that the municipality will look at the matter again in November.

This is only the amount from my calendar in September. However, I believe that the above gives a pretty good picture of how things generally look out on the placement of Denmark

Abolition of the right of appeal

In June 2014 the Danish Parliament adopted the Law no. 737 amending bl. a. Procedure Code and Social Services. The background was a "modernization and streamlining of proceedings before the courts". This would, among other things implemented by limiting the right of appeal. Requirements below 20,000 kr., And cases there appears to be won, had to be cut from right to appeal. Parliament found that cases of forced removal of citizens' children should be included among these trivial cases where the right to appeal the revocation, appeal the future can only be made in exceptional circumstances and with the process of appropriation Board's permission.

The above should be read in conjunction with the Danish courts compared to courts in other European countries are among the most scraped. Court Administration has "Status of Court reform" of April 2009 presented statistics showing that Danish courts already then soon be able to make most decisions for the least money with the fewest judges compared to the other Nordic countries. Parliament could instead have chosen to hire more judges in the High Courts, if only it were case processing times to be reduced.

When Karen Hækkerup made ​​the proposal for the above law, this was also motivated by the fact that it was very few decisions that were changed in the High Court.
The Minister pointed out that only 2% of forced removal cases that were overturned by the High Courts. For the same legislative work shows in greater detail, it is between 4.3 and 2.1 percent of the cases, which overturned the High Court. In 2013, 10 of the cases were appealed to the High Court, as amended by the High Court, an appeal opportunity in the future are cut off.

Case law

The low reversal rates does not necessarily indicate that the cases should not be appealed. The reason may well be that the cases - in my opinion - has thus far been a very cursory and superficial treatment both at the administrative and judicial authorities:

In a judgment of the High Court (dept. 6. B-1718-09) requested an attorney about to be devoted four hours to the case, which concerned the forced removal of a child. He would, among other interrogate a child placed. Moreover, he wanted either a questioning of the examiner or by a written statement from this.
This protested Kammeradvokaten against.

The High Court pointed out here that the "usual time spent in involuntary commitment proceedings is hours, why setting the date of 2½ hours must be regarded as fully adequate."

It was determined that the child would not testify. The court reasoned that the fact that "the courts make a judicial review of the Board's decision." The High Court also prevented the lawyer's other requests for evidence. The High Court stated that: "There is no information that provides the right basis to call witnesses or obtain a declaration from the person concerned."

That decision became a precedent in Danish law. Therefore, in practice, never put witnesses in child removal cases and cases run mostly through the courts in about 1 hour. This is related to the courts alone make a "judicial review" and thus does not address whether the forcible removal is at all reasonable.

A judicial review is a review of its legal basis, authority, competence, etc.. There is not before the court ruled on whether it is appropriate or best for the child, the child must be placed without. A lawyer to litigate in a placement case, thus does not say that it is better that the child comes home because .... Here, instead just procederes that the municipality is not the placement. Judicial review is of the reasons given most often irrelevant because there actually is no review by the courts of whether the forcible removal is appropriate or not.

The considerations above may seem very theoretical. However, it has great importance whether, in cases of child placement can only be determined whether the judge is a judge, and the law is "legal" or whether instead determined whether the caseworker has made a reasonable and good decision. It is this fact that leads to the judge in the High Court decision cited above do not find it necessary to be carried out interrogations of the child or by the examiner - the judge must examine only the Appeals Board has taken a legal decision.

Credentials Access in placement cases

High Court decision referred to above has - unfortunately - influenced the treatment of child removal cases in all the courts in cases of child placement:

When municipalities will place a child, the municipality issuing the order. If citizens do not agree with this decision, the matter shall be submitted to the Children and Youth Committee. Here are some members of the City Council, which is the case presented, which must approve the decision.

The child removal cases, the citizen as in other cases by public authorities allowed to take a lawyer to meetings by the municipality and Appeals Board. Appeals Board has in recent years refused to agree the time for meetings with national or his lawyer. The meetings conducted without regard to whether the citizen or his lawyer have the opportunity to be present. Is the citizen - or lawyer - indisposed for example due to illness or appointing of other meetings, conducted the meeting anyway. This unusual practice is not followed by other authorities such as the Tax Administration or the courts, where the meetings are arranged with the citizen lawyer. The practice undermines the principle of free choice of lawyer, which applies to most places in the world, citizens in child removal cases are forced to choose a lawyer who has sufficient space in his diary that the lawyer with a very short notice can intervene in the case. The practice not to schedule the lawyers are to a large extent also also followed in child and youth committees. As municipalities increasingly requires citizens to pay for the lawyer's travel and as most parents forced removed the children have the opportunity to pay the lawyer's travel narrows the lawyer elections further.

During the preparation of the municipality or Appeals Board forwarded the file usually so late to the citizen lawyer, the lawyer in practice given the opportunity to request further inquiries or additional information, for example from the municipality. The lawyer has no right to call witnesses to the meeting and the parents lawyer has not the opportunity to ask the child questions. The file will flow case, the acts municipality chooses to present to the committee. There is no question of the whole file. It is repeatedly seen that municipalities have developed psychological reports based on documents from the administration single-handedly send to a psychologist. This psychologist has no contact with the parents, and the parents are not informed before the report is presented before the meeting. Psychological Reports is an important determinant of whether a child should be placed, or return to their homes.

Appeals Board against the decision on placement of children, the interruption of contact between parents and children or the decision to attempt a return home (continued placements) noted frequently serious errors in local authority decisions. In September 2014, the Appeals Board published a report showing that the law was not observed in 39% of a series of cases treated by municipalities that Appeals Board had examined some municipalities have had error rates higher than 80. Appeals Board only usually to criticize but one such result in criticism but not the invalidity of the decision. Maintaining placement continued despite the often very serious mistake.

If citizens want to proceed with the case, it must be brought before the district court. It is my impression that there are important differences in the extent to which carried out a complete review or only one judicial review by the district courts. In any event, the District Court's decision in the future could usually not be appealed.

The major responsibility
On the one hand it is important to protect children from abuse by parents who can not take care of their children. On the other hand, it is equally important not to place children outside there is good reason for this. SFI has in several studies shown that placement is not the solution to a problem, only the start of it. Children in care have as adults, poorer education, more mental health problems and less contact with their families than those who have not been placed outside the home during their childhood. It takes on the whole a really good mentality to withstand being placed.

Legal guarantees is a security that we take the right decision. It can be expensive to have tried a case in several instances. It may be difficult to hear those who have a different opinion. There can be time consuming to have a case stated that all aspects appears. But such a big decision, as it is to take a child away from their families and placing it at the municipal level, will, if we make the wrong decision could cost much more.

Therefore, I believe that it is extremely critical that while accepting a very high error rate in placement cases choose to restrict the right credentials in the placement area.

Om prøvelse i sager om anbringelse af børn. Af Hanne Ziebe, advokat #dkPol @manusareen #odense #holstebro #midtjylland


Om prøvelse i sager om anbringelse af børn.

Praksis på anbringelsesområdet: 

En dommer i en kommune i det sydlige Jylland sagde for nyligt under et møde i kommunens børn- og ungeudvalg følgende: ”Det er meget utilfredsstillende, at advokaten og vi andre ikke har fået sagens akter. Men nu vil vi kraftigt henstille til, at kommunen husker at fremsende sagsakterne til næste møde, når sagen skal genbehandles om to år”. Med disse ord, blev den lille dreng tvangsanbragt i to år.

Af øvrige eksempler fra min praksis fra september måned i 2014:

Holstebro Kommune valgte at anbringe nogle børn, først i forhold til moderen, og en måned senere kunne faderen komme ind og få prøvet hans sag. Her blev det besluttet, at børnene også skulle anbringes i forhold til ham.
Faderens sag var således reelt afgjort en måned inden, han kom til mødet og havde ikke en oplevelse af, at han kunne få prøvet sin sag, der var jo truffet beslutning om anbringelse af børnene under moderens sag. I denne sag var man på denne måde kommet til at anbringe forældrene i stedet for børnene, og sagen har nu to genbehandlingsfrister i forhold til børnene.

I Odense kommune blev det ikke anset for et problem, at et byrådsmedlem, der skulle godkende en beslutning om anbringelse af et barn, havde en endog en meget klar holdning til moderen.

Efter at moderen var afhørt på mødet, og advokaterne var kommet med deres afsluttende bemærkninger, rejste byrådsmedlemmet sig op og sagde henvendt til min klient: ”Jeg er godt nok træt af dig”. Han henviste videre til en lang række telefonsamtaler og en e-mail korrespondance, som han igennem længere tid forud for mødet havde haft med moderen. Efter et par minutters enetale blev han stoppet af dommeren. Moderen blev derpå til et venterum, så udvalget kunne træffe beslutning. Dommeren meddelte kort efter, at udvalget enstemmigt havde besluttet at tvangsfjerne barnet. Moderen havde ikke en oplevelse af at have fået en retfærdig prøvelse af anbringelsen af hendes søn. For det første fordi et af udvalgets stemmeberettigede medlemmer åbenlyst havde tilkendegivet, at han ikke kunne lide min klient. For det andet fordi han tog det sidste ord i sagen og procederede mod min klient og således fik en platform til at påvirke de øvrige medlemmer. Dommeren afviste at det pågældende var inhabil under sagen.

Den sidste sag jeg vil nævne, er en sag fra en midtjysk kommune. Her har et ung par kæmpet for at komme i kontakt med kommune, for at få kommunen til at aflevere deres børn tilbage. Kommunen fik godkendelse til at anbringe børnene i et år, og det år er nu gået. Der er ikke truffet nogle afgørelser eller aftaler, der kan lovliggøre anbringelsen af børnene. Forældrene har fået at vide, at sagsbehandleren har været på ferie, og at kommunen vil se på sagen engang i november.

Dette er alene afgørelser fra min kalender i september måned. Jeg mener dog, at ovenstående giver et ganske godt billede af, hvordan forholdene generelt ser ud på anbringelsesområdet i Danmark

Afskaffelse af ankeadgang

I juni 2014 vedtog folketinget lov nr. 737 om ændring af bl. a. retsplejeloven og serviceloven. Baggrunden var en ”modernisering og effektivisering af sagsbehandlingen ved domstolene”. Dette skulle blandt andet gennemføres ved at begrænse retten til at anke.

Krav under 20.000 kr. og sager, der ikke ser ud til at kunne vindes, skulle afskæres fra retten til at anke. Folketinget fandt, at sager om tvangsfjernelse af borgernes børn skulle henregnes blandt disse bagatelsager, hvor retten til at anke blev ophævet, således at anke fremover kun kan ske under ganske særlige omstændigheder og med procesbevillingsnævnets tilladelse.

Ovennævnte skal ses i sammenhæng med, at danske domstole sammenlignet med domstolene i andre europæiske lande er blandt de mest skrabede. Domstolsstyrelsen har i ”Status af Domstolsreformen” fra april 2009 fremlagt statistik, som viser, at danske domstole allerede dengang hurtigst kunne afsige flest afgørelser for færrest penge med færrest dommere i forhold til de øvrige nordiske lande.

Folketinget kunne i stedet have valgt at ansætte flere dommere i Landsretterne, hvis det blot var sagsbehandlingstiderne, der skulle reduceres.

Da Karen Hækkerup fremsatte forslaget til ovennævnte lov, blev dette ligeledes begrundet med, at det var meget få afgørelser, der blev ændret i Landsretten.
Ministeren henviste til, at det kun var 2% af tvangsfjernelsessagerne, der blev omgjort af landsretterne. Af samme lovforarbejder fremgår det nærmere, at det er mellem 4,3 og 2,1 procent af sagerne, der omgøres af landsretten. I 2013 blev 10 af de sager, der blev anket til landsretten, ændret af landsretten, en ankemulighed der fremover afskæres.

Retspraksis
De lave omgørelsesprocenter skyldes ikke nødvendigvis, at sagerne ikke burde være anket. Årsagen kan meget vel være, at sagerne – efter min opfattelse – hidtil har fået en meget summarisk og overfladisk behandling både ved de administrative myndigheder og domstolene:

I en dom fra Østre Landsret (afd. 6. B-1718-09) anmodede en advokat om, at der skulle afsættes 4 timer til sagen, som vedrørte tvangsfjernelse af et barn. Han ville blandt andet afhøre det anbragte barn. Derudover ønskede han enten en afhøring af sagsbehandleren eller en skriftlig redegørelse fra denne.
Dette protesterede Kammeradvokaten imod.

Landsretten bemærkede hertil, at ”sædvanlig tidsforbrug i tvangsfjernelsessager er 1½ timer, hvorfor en berammelse på 2½ time må anses for fuldt tilstrækkeligt.”

Det blev bestemt, at barnet ikke skulle afgive forklaring. Landsretten begrundende dette med, at ”domstolene foretager en legalitetsprøvelse af Ankestyrelsens afgørelse”. Landsretten afskar også advokatens øvrige begæringer om bevisførelse. Landsretten udtalte herom: ”Der er ikke fremkommet oplysninger, som giver retten grundlag for at indkalde vidner eller indhente en erklæring fra den pågældende”.

Denne afgørelse har fået præcedens i dansk ret. Derfor bliver der i praksis, aldrig ført vidner i børnefjernelsessager, og sagerne køres oftest igennem ved domstolene på omkring 1 time. Dette hænger sammen med, at domstolene alene foretager en ”legalitetsprøvelse” og således ikke tager stilling til, om tvangsfjernelsen overhovedet er rimelig.

En legalitetsprøvelse er en prøvelse af afgørelsens retsgrundlag, myndighedens kompetence mv. Der bliver således ikke ved retten taget stilling til, om det er hensigtsmæssigt eller bedst for barnet, at barnet skal være tvangsanbragt. En advokat der skal procedere i en anbringelsessag, skal altså ikke sige, at det er bedre, at barnet kommer hjem, fordi.... Her skal i stedet blot procederes på, at kommunen ikke har hjemmel til anbringelsen. Domstolsprøvelsen bliver af de anførte grunde oftest irrelevant, idet der reelt ikke sker en prøvelse ved domstolene af, hvorvidt tvangsfjernelsen er hensigtsmæssig eller ikke.

Betragtningerne ovenfor kan virke meget teoretiske. Det har imidlertid meget stor betydning, om det i anbringelsessager kun kan prøves, om dommeren er dommer, og loven er ”lovlig”, eller om der i stedet prøves, om sagsbehandleren har truffet en fornuftig og god beslutning. Det er disse forhold, som fører til, at dommeren i Landsretsafgørelsen citeret ovenfor ikke finder det er nødvendig, at der skal foretages afhøringer af barnet eller af sagsbehandleren – dommeren skal kun undersøge om Ankestyrelsen har truffet en legal beslutning.

Prøvelsesadgangen i anbringelsessager

Landsretsafgørelsen omtalt ovenfor har - desværre – påvirket behandlingen af børnefjernelsessager i alle instanser i anbringelsessager:

Når kommunerne vil anbringe et barn, er det kommunen, der træffer afgørelsen. Hvis borgerne ikke er enige i denne beslutning, skal sagen forelægges for Børn og Unge-udvalget. Her er det nogle medlemmer fra byrådet, der får sagen præsenteret, og som skal godkende beslutningen.

I børnefjernelsessager har borgeren ligesom i andre sager ved offentlige myndigheder lov til at tage en advokat med til møder ved kommunen og ankestyrelsen. Ankestyrelsen har de senere år nægtet at aftale tidspunktet for møder med borgeren eller dennes advokat. Møderne gennemføres uden hensyn til, om borgeren eller dennes advokat har mulighed for at være til stede. Er borgeren – eller advokaten – forhindret i at møde for eksempel på grund af sygdom, eller berammelse af andre møder, gennemføres mødet alligevel. Denne usædvanlige praksis følges ikke af andre myndigheder som for eksempel SKAT eller domstolene, hvor møder aftales med borgerens advokat. Praksis udhuler princippet om frit advokatvalg, der gælder de fleste steder i verden, idet borgere i børnefjernelsessager tvinges til at vælge en advokat, der har så god plads i sin kalender, at advokaten med et meget kort varsel kan indtræde i sagen. Praksis med ikke at beramme med advokaterne, bliver i stort omfang ligeledes også fulgt i børn- og ungeudvalgene. Da kommunerne i stigende grad pålægger borgerne selv at betale for advokatens rejse, og da de færreste forældre til tvangsfjernede børn har mulighed for selv at betale advokatens rejse, indsnævres advokatvalget yderligere.

Under sagens forberedelse ved kommunen eller ankestyrelsen fremsendes sagens akter normalt så sent til borgerens advokat, at advokaten i praksis ikke får mulighed for at begære yderligere undersøgelser eller yderligere oplysninger for eksempel fra kommunen. Advokaten har ikke mulighed for at indkalde vidner til mødet og forældrenes advokat har ikke mulighed for at stille barnet spørgsmål. De sagsakter der tilgår sagen, er de akter kommunen vælger at fremlægge for udvalget. Der er således ikke tale om samtlige sagsakter. Det er flere gange set, at kommuner får udarbejdet psykolograpporter på baggrund af sagsakter, som forvaltningen egenhændigt sender til en psykolog. Denne psykolog har ingen kontakt til forældrene, og forældrene informeres ikke før rapporten fremlægges op til mødet. Psykolograpporter er i høj grad bestemmende for, om et barn skal anbringes eller hjemgives.

Ankestyrelsens prøvelse af beslutningen om anbringelse af børn, om afbrydelse af kontakt mellem forældre og børn eller beslutningen om at forsøg på hjemgivelse (videreførte anbringelser) konstatere jævnligt alvorlige fejl i kommunernes afgørelser. I september 2014 har Ankestyrelsen offentliggjort en rapport, som viser, at loven ikke blev overholdt i 39% af en række sager behandlet ved kommunerne, som Ankestyrelsen havde undersøgt, enkelte kommuner har haft fejlprocenter på over 80. Ankestyrelsen nøjes sædvanligvis med at rejse kritik men en sådanne medfører kritik men ikke ugyldighed af afgørelsen. Opretholdelse af anbringelse videreføres på trods af ofte meget alvorlige fejl.

Hvis borgerne ønsker at gå videre med sagen, skal den indbringes for byretten. Det er mit indtryk, at der er stor forskel på, i hvilket omfang der foretages en fuldstændig prøvelse eller alene en legalitetsprøvelse ved byretterne. Under alle omstændigheder vil Byrettens afgørelse fremover normalt ikke kunne ankes.

Det store ansvar

På den ene side er det vigtigt at beskytte børn mod overgreb fra forældre, der ikke kan tage vare på børnene. På den anden side er det mindst lige så vigtigt ikke at anbringe børn, uden der er god grund til dette. SFI har i flere undersøgelser påvist, at en anbringelse ikke er løsningen på et problem, kun starten på det. Anbragte børn har som voksne, en dårligere skoleuddannelse, flere psykiske problemer og mindre kontakt til deres familier end personer, der ikke har været anbragt uden for hjemmet i deres barndom. Det kræver i det hele taget en rigtig god psyke at tåle at blive anbragt.

Retsgarantier er en sikring for at vi træffer den rigtige afgørelse. Det kan være dyrt at få prøvet en sag i flere instanser. Det kan være besværligt at høre dem der har en anden mening. Der kan være tidskrævende at få en sag oplyst, så alle aspekter kommer frem. Men en så stor beslutning, som det er at tage et barn væk fra dets familie og placere det i kommunalt regi, vil, hvis vi træffer en forkert beslutning, komme til at koste meget mere.

Derfor mener jeg, at det er særdeles kritisk, at samtidig med, at man accepterer en meget høj fejlprocent i anbringelsessager vælger at begrænse prøvelsesretten indenfor anbringelsesområdet.

onsdag den 22. oktober 2014

#dkPol #Handicap: Ret til at være Forældre og sundhesloven vs socialloven ... noget er gjalt



Når jeg læser det 5 pukter af 30, som stammer fra 72 kritikpunkter (kopieret på engelsk i bunden af min indlæg) savner jeg handicappede børns rettigheder i disse inklusionstider .... jeg savner også hvordan anbringelsesområdet implementere "ret til at være forældre" for jeg ser Ankestyrelsen begår konkrete og massive fejl ved at overse Kommunal lovbrud.

Når jeg læser Manu Sareens opfattelse i avisen om at retssikkerhedsloven og sundhedsloven ikke er en del af det populer social indsats for at hjælpe børn - det indsats kommunen leverer som er til tider en indsats som er langt under fagligt forsvarligt er jeg rystet. Kommunen får ingen ansvar hver gang et barn får det dårliger grundet deres indsats - oftest går det ud over bærn med hadnicap hvor kommunen anbrigner børnene grundet adfærd uden at tage hensyn til evt. handicap. Se, Kommunen undviger bevidst og målrettet alt som beskriver at et barn har et handicap for at kun mene barnet er "skadet i hjemmet", skader de beskriver uden at undersæge barnet jvf sundhedslovens bestemmelser.

Faktisk får Kommunen bare lov at abrjeder videre i årevis som vi blev opmærksom på i udsendelsen Socialrådgiverne på dr.dk - det system bør akut integeres bedre med det øvrige lovområder da det er som om de har skabt deres egen parallel behandlingssystem hvor en indsatser og udrednigner strækker sig over flere år med de borger som skla hjælpes som årsag for at loven ikke efterleves.

Når jeg læser at Manu Sareen opfatter FN's anbefalinger som at værende noget andre afdelinger skal håndtere vil jeg spørge ham:

- Har socialministeriet så husket at integrer retssikkerhedsloven og sundhedsloven i deres anbefalinger til Kommunerne?
- Og hvis det er tilfældet hvordan er det så at menneske rettighedsinstitution skal anbefale det følgende 5 punkter?
- Hvorfor ender anbragte børn i behandlings insittutioner hvor de behandles "isoleret og segregeret" fra det øvrige samfund både skole og sundhedsmæssigt uden at lovpligtige psykolog udrednigner er lavet årligt, uden at en spykiater er ind over diagnose børn, hvor der ikke engang er en læge som overser behandlingerne - eller er det bare et "fejl" som ingen vil se?
- Hvordan er det at Ankestyrelsen ikke opdager at lovpligtige udredninger ikke er tilbudt en familie inden en anbringelse, eller tilbudt ved at Kommunen bevidst "vælger" opholdssteder eller institutioner som ikke har kendskab til et handicappede barns alders eller målgruppe ... at alle arbejder frememedrettede når skaden er sket bør stoppes!



RESUME fra ret til at være Forældre

RISIKO FOR AT BLIVE ERKLÆRET UEGNET SOM FORÆLDER


Fælles for de fleste af sagerne er, at der ikke er foretaget en fyldestgørende sagsbehandling, herunder inddragelse af kommunernes handicapafdeling. Det er
slående, at sagsbehandlerne ofte ikke synes at have kendskab til karakteren af forældrenes handicap og betydningen heraf for forældre rollen. Når den fagligt ansvarlige for forældre kompetenceundersøgelserne heller ikke har ekspertise i forhold til forældrenes handicap, kan forældrenes behov for støtte blive overset. Forældrene risikerer dermed at blive erklæret uegnede som forældre, uden
at det er undersøgt, om de kunne klare deres forældreopgaver med den rigtige støtte.

UNDERSØGELSENS ANBEFALINGER

1. ANBEFALING OM KOMPENSATION:

Forældre med handicap har ret til støtte til at være forældre. Kommunale og statslige myndigheder har pligt til at sikre, at denne ret virkeliggøres. Institut for Menneskerettigheder anbefaler, at Socialministeriet udarbejder en bekendtgørelse om ”hjælp og støtte til forældre, der på grund
af handicap har behov for hjælp eller særlig støtte til at være forældre.” Den skal bl.a. præcisere pligten til, at forældre med handicap skal kompenseres, før kommunen udarbejder en forældrekompetenceundersøgelse. 

2. ANBEFALING OM SAGSBEHANDLING:

Instituttet anbefaler, at kommunerne sikrer en særlig grundig sagsbehandling i sager om tvangsfjernelse af børn fra forældre med handicap samt en bedre koordinering mellem de kommunale forvaltninger. Institut for Menneskerettigheder anbefaler, at der indføres en udtrykkelig klageadgang til Ankestyrelsen over fejlbehæftet og dårlig sagsbehandling i sager om tvangsfjernelse af børn fra forældre med handicap.

3. ANBEFALING OM KOGNITIVE HANDICAP:

Institut for Menneskerettigheder anbefaler, at det eksplicit fremgår af vejledningen til servicelovens § 85, at socialpædagogisk hjælp efter denne bestemmelse kan anvendes i forhold til udvikling af forældrekompetencer hos de forældre med kognitive handicap, som har behov for det.

4. ANBEFALING OM ’FRIVILLIGE ANBRINGELSER’:

Institut for Menneskerettigheder anbefaler, at Socialministeriet iværksætter en praksis undersøgelse eller en velfærdsundersøgelse om ’frivillige anbringelser’.

5. ANBEFALING OM MULTIDISKRIMINATION:
Institut for Menneskerettigheder anbefaler, at Socialministeriet får indsamlet og formidlet viden om familier med handicap og etnisk minoritetsbaggrund for at sikre beskyttelse mod multidiskrimiation i forhold til retten til at være forældre.
Kort vil jeg pensle 3 ting som jeg ikke begribede jvf. udsendelsen på dr-dk hvor Odense Kommune lavede et program de kaldt Socialrådgiveren. Jeg har en Sundhedsfaglig uddannelse og ser Handicap samt mennesket i udsendelserne ...

Indsatser som varer 11 år, uden synlig effekt, antyder at indsatsen ikke er det rette. En indsats som leverer en borger frustreret og i afmagt er skadeligt. Indsatser hvor disse mennesker under socialloven oplever at f. eks psykiatriloven er tilsidesat og tvang bruges uden at socialrådgiverne har indsigt i deres handlinger jvf en borgers eventuelle Handicap.


F. eks når en forældre med §85 bostøtte ikke konkret evalueres med en forældreevne undersøgelse bør vi alle spærre øjnene åben - problemet er sagerne er så udvandet at Ankestyrelsen ikke fanger disse "fejl" hvis bare personen samarbejder. Forstå mig ret: Handicappede forældre har en rettighed til at være forælde og det ret kræver at Kommunen levere støtte, forbyggende og problemløsende. At den god samarbejde vægtes således at en person kan undvige undersøgelser ender ofte i tragiske sager ...  ligeledes er det mere grotesk at forældre står uden en indsats og dermed mister kontakt med børnene grundet dette uden at Kommunen stilles ansvarligt, for at Kommunen dækker deres fejl ved bryde flere lov end rimeligt.

I den udsendelse er ordblindhed ganske vist ret overset som et problem i deres indsats ikke virker.

Jeg var rystet da jeg så det tvangsbehandling Kommunen levere jvf det ordblinde barn på 16 år med psykisk syge forældre. Det er bestemt noget vi i Danmark bør skamme os over! Jeg var rystet over at en social indsats over 11 år resulterer i en families handicap ikke er opdaget ... jeg er rystet over at indsatserne kommer så sent i gang og leveres af ufaglærte - en ung knægts holdninger under tvang til et barn som har behov for en profesionel indsats ... hvad tænker vi dog på?

Tænk at et 16 årige skal lære at læse med Postman Per bøger beregnet for vuggestue/børnehave børn? Hvad er det for noget ... vil du behandles sådan? Og så ovenikøbet mobbes med bogen for at oplære ungen i at affinde sig og sige "pyt"? Magen til ydmygelse havde jeg længe ikke set - men det kræver en forståelse for den unges handicap, at ved hvordan det føles når læsning er svært og en fastholdes på samme niveau i årevis. At Odense Kommune både praler med en af landets bedste ordblidne indsatser og levere sådan et service til svage borger - det bør undersøges. Det kan ses i afsnit 2 men familien følges i alle afsnit http://www.dr.dk/tv/se/socialradgiverne/socialradgiverne-1-6

At Kommunernes social indsats er baseret på frivillig / tvang - skriv under eller ... og det overfor to mennesker som ikke engang aner at deres barn "fejl håndteres skolemæssigt" men som også har spykiske problemer kan vel ikke helt være efter bogen? At den unge mærker at det føles forkert, taler om sig selv som institutionaliseret går nok det flestes næser forbi i det "os og dem" verden som er skabt! At han protestere men Socialrådgiveren ikke kan læse det handicappede persons signaler - er noget kun uddannelse kan løse! Jeg tror næppe lærer, socialrådgiverer og pædagoger får oplæring i handicap - det program viser en udpræget behov for at alle skal socialtrænes, uden at årsagen til deres social mangler opdages.




Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
Concluding observations on the initial report of Denmark*
I. Introduction
  1. The Committee considered the initial report of the Kingdom of Denmark (CRPD/C/DNK/1) at its 155th and 156th meetings, held on 23 and 24 September 2014, respectively, and adopted the following concluding observations at its 169th meeting, held on 2 October 2014.
  2. The Committee welcomes the initial report of the Kingdom of Denmark, comprising the information on Denmark and the self-governed territories within the Kingdom, namely the Faroe Islands and Greenland, which was prepared in accordance with the Committee’s reporting guidelines, and thanks the State party for the written replies (CRPD/C/DNK/Q/1/Add.1) to the list of issues prepared by the Committee.
  3. The Committee appreciates the fruitful dialogue held with the State party’s delegation during the consideration of the report and commends the State party for the strength of its delegation, which included many representatives of relevant Government ministries, as well as representatives of the Government ministries of the Faroe Islands and of Greenland, responsible for the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
II. Positive aspects
  1. The Committee commends the State party for its efforts to review and amend its legislation, particularly the adoption of the Consolidation Act on Social Services No. 1093 of 5 September 2013, the Consolidation Act No. 727 of 2009 to Compensate Disabled Persons in Employment and the Act No. 31 of 2005 on Prohibition against Discrimination in the Labour Market, and the amendment to the Upper Secondary School Act, with a view to integrate persons with autism, in 2013The Committee commends the Government of the Faroe Islands for the adoption of the Act against Discrimination in the Labour Market due to Disability, which entered into force in May 2011,.
  2. The Committee also commends the State party for initiating programmes on the rights of persons with disabilities, such as the plan of action for people with mental disabilities in May 2014, and increasing the resources available in this area.
  3. The Committee commends the State party on a number of achievements. It welcomes that the Danish Sign Language has been recognized as an official language which is an important step towards full recognition of the rights of persons with disabilities in the State party. The Committee also notes that the State party has established a coordination body – the Inter-Ministerial Committee, commissioned to implement the Convention within the sectorial fields under the coordinating authority of the Ministry of Children, Gender Equality, Integration and Social Affairs. The Committee further commends the State party for exemplary role in the international development assistance and for integration of a disability policy perspective therein. The Committee also commends the Government of Greenland for commencing the establishment of a national disability center in Sisimut, Greenland.
  4. The Committee welcomes the State party’s accession to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, with the territorial exclusion of Greenland, on 23 September 2014.
III. Principal areas of concern and recommendations
A. General principles and obligations (arts. 1–4)
  1. The Committee is concerned that the National Disability Action Plan of 2013 does not cover broadly all of the rights and substantive areas under the Convention, and that it remains relatively general.
  2. The Committee recommends that the State party review the National Disability Action Plan to ensure the coverage of all rights and substantive areas under the Convention, and in this regard establish concrete objectives, measurable targets, adequate budget and indicators to evaluate progress in implementation of the Government’s disability policy.
  3. The Committee is concerned about the absence of disability policy action plans in the Faroe Islands and Greenland, and in particular the lack of support to organizations of persons with disabilities in Greenland to enable them to engage with the Government in implementation of the Convention.
  4. The Committee recommends that the Governments of the Faroe Islands and of Greenland adopt dedicated disability policy action plans to effectively implement the Convention. It also recommends that the Government of Greenland support the work of organizations of persons with disabilities to ensure their effective participation in being consulted and involved in implementing the Convention.
  5. The Committee is concerned that the Convention is not explicitly incorporated into the laws of Denmark, the Faroe Islands and Greenland. It is also concerned at the insufficient information about the application of the Convention by the State party’s courts and authorities. The Committee further notes with concern that officials of state, regional and municipal authorities are not sufficiently aware of their obligation to promote the implementation of the Convention.
  6. The Committee recommends that the State party ensure incorporation of the Convention for it to be applicable as law of Denmark, the Faroe Islands and Greenland. The Committee further recommends that the State party take measures to facilitate direct application of the Convention before courts and authorities, and undertake training programmes to facilitate active application and implementation of the Convention by the officials of state, regional and municipal authorities in all parts of the Kingdom of Denmark, including by providing guidance to the municipalities on the implementation of the respective acts on social services in observance of the Convention’s provisions.
B. Specific rights (arts. 5–30)
Equality and non-discrimination (art. 5)
  1. The Committee notes the establishment of the Government’s anti-discrimination unit with a mandate to monitor and prevent discrimination against persons with disabilities; however it is concerned that the State party lacks a comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation, which would provide protection from discrimination on the basis of disability beyond the labour market. The Committee is also concerned at the lack of legal remedies for persons with disabilities whose rights under the Convention have been violated, and the absence of available information thereon.
  2. The Committee urges the Governments of Denmark, the Faroe Islands and Greenland to adopt new comprehensive cross-sectoral anti-discrimination legislation, extending protection beyond the labour market and affirming the denial of reasonable accommodation as a form of discrimination on the basis of disability. The Committee recommends that the State party take steps to ensure that reasonable accommodation is provided in all spheres of society without any exemption; that it ensure effective legal remedies to persons with disabilities, including the possibility to submit complaints related to discrimination on the basis of disability to the Board of Equal Treatment; and that it promote better awareness of the Convention among rights holders.
  3. The Committee is concerned at the lack of disaggregated data on the cases of multiple and intersectional discrimination, and the inadequate measures for dealing with cases of intersectional discrimination, for example disability combined with gender or ethnicity, which require more development.
  4. The Committee recommends that the State party collect and disseminate disaggregated data on the cases of multiple and intersectional discrimination, and adopt effective and specific measures to prevent multiple and intersectional forms of discrimination, including permitting complaints of discrimination on more than one ground, establishing higher levels of compensation for victims, and higher penalties for perpetrators.
Women with disabilities (art. 6)
  1. The Committee is concerned that the Act on Gender Equality does not specifically address women and girls with disabilities. The Committee is also concerned that the State party has not undertaken any specific initiatives aimed at women and girls with disabilities in the educational system or any specific measures for women with disabilities to find or maintain employment.
  2. The Committee recommends that the State party ensure that the perspective of gender and disability is encompassed in the laws and policies, its sectorial services and their implementation and evaluation. The Committee also recommends that the State party take measures to increase opportunities for women and girls with disabilities for adequate education and employment.
Children with disabilities (art. 7)
  1. The Committee is concerned that, according to the National Council for Children, children who are hospitalized in psychiatric hospitals can be subject to forced treatment.
  2. The Committee recommends that the State party abolish forced hospitalization and treatment of children in psychiatric hospitals, and provide adequate opportunities for information and counselling to ensure that all children with disabilities have the support they need to express their views.
Awareness-raising (art. 8)
  1. The Committee is concerned about the reports of prevailing prejudice among the general population about various forms of disabilities which negatively affects the ability of persons with disabilities to enjoy rights on an equal basis, including in the area of employment.
  2. The Committee encourages the State party to devise and adopt a strategy, in consultation with organizations of persons with disabilities, with concrete and measureable targets to raise awareness throughout the society -amongst the general public, government and private sectors, and persons with disabilities themselves, to promote the positive image of persons with disabilities and knowledge about their rights.
  3. The Committee notes with concern the limited information on the level of awareness about the contents of the Convention among public officials and private actors, including the concepts of reasonable accommodation and disability-based discrimination.
  4. The Committee recommends that the State party undertake and regularly evaluate campaigns and other forms of training, in cooperation with organizations of persons with disabilities, for public officials and private actors to promote their knowledge of the rights and obligations stemming from the Convention, in particular in regard to reasonable accommodation.
Accessibility (art. 9)
  1. The Committee is concerned at the absence of comprehensive measures to ensure to persons with disabilities access, on an equal basis with others, to the physical environment, to transportation, to information and communications, and to other facilities and services open or provided to the public, both in urban and rural areas. The Committee also notes with concern the lack of systematic compliance with the Building Regulations and the limited access to transport. The Committee further notes with concern that information on public websites is not systematically published in accessible formats.
  2. The Committee recommends that the State party adopt a comprehensive plan to ensure to all persons with disabilities access to facilities, information and services, which would include concrete objectives, timeframes, budget, sanctions and evaluation, as elaborated in the Committee’s General Comment No. 2. In this regard, the Committee recommends that the State party: a) conduct continuous training on universal design and accessibility standards including the Building Regulations for relevant professionals and systematically enforce sanctions for those who fail to implement accessibility standards; b) ensure that private entities which offer public transport and other services observe accessibility requirements; and c) adopt regulation on digital accessibility and access to information technology and communication and promote the responsibility of public institutions to present information and communications on its websites in accessible formats, in accordance with international standards.
  3. The Committee is concerned that TV programmes on the public service channel KVF in the Faroe Islands are only subtitled and/or interpreted into sign language if considered of “major interest and significance in the society”.
  4. The Committee requests that the Government of the Faroe Islands ensure access for both people who are deaf and hard of hearing to all the programmes broadcasted by KVF.
Situations of risk and humanitarian emergencies (art. 11)
  1. The Committee is concerned at the lack of information by the State party on the involvement of persons with disabilities and their organizations in the elaboration, implementation and evaluation of the Strategy for Danish Humanitarian Action 2010-2015 and the absence of specific alert systems or protocols to provide persons with disabilities with the necessary support and protection in the event of risk or emergencies.
  2. The Committee recommends that the State party undertake action to ensure that disaster risk reduction is fully inclusive of persons with disabilities; to develop and enforce accessible alert systems or protocols; and to organize training for rescue and emergency personnel to provide persons with disabilities with the necessary support and protection in the event of risk or emergencies.
Equal recognition before the law (art. 12)
  1. The Committee notes that the Legal Incapacity and Guardianship Act continues to allow for substituted decision-making thereby restricting the individual’s exercise of rights such as the right to vote, access to justice, and consent to medical treatment.
  2. The Committee recommends that the State party review the Legal Incapacity and Guardianship Act and introduce into legislation supported decision-making which respects the person’s rights, will and preferences, in full conformity with article 12 of the Convention, including the individual’s right to give and withdraw informed consent for medical treatment, to have access to justice, to vote, to marry and to work.
Liberty and security of the person (art. 14)
  1. The Committee is concerned by the distinction made by the State party between punishment and treatment, according to which persons considered “unfit to stand trial” for their impairment are not punished but sentenced to treatment. Treatment is a social control sanction and should be substituted by formal criminal sanctions for offenders whose involvement in crime is determined. The procedure applied to determine the sentence to treatment is not in accordance with the safeguards a criminal procedure should have in order to impose a sanction to a person. Sentence to treatment is thereby incompatible with article 14.
  2. The Committee recommends that the State party adopt a policy to initiate a structural revision of the procedures used to sanction persons with disabilities when they commit criminal offenses. The system should comply with the general safeguards and guarantees established for all persons accused of a crime in the criminal justice system, inter alia, the presumption of innocence, the right to defence and to a fair trial.
  3. The Committee is concerned that the Psychiatric Act allows for compulsion of a person with mental health impairments against her or his will to hospitalization or treatment in a medical facility if the person is considered to be a danger to herself or himself or to others, which amount to a deprivation of liberty or security on the basis of disability, contrary to article 14 of the Convention.
  4. The Committee recommends that the State party take all necessary measures, including through the revision of the Psychiatric Act, to ensure that persons with disabilities enjoy the right to liberty and security of person. The Committee recommends that the State party ensure that no one will be detained in any facility, on the basis of actual or perceived disability.
Freedom from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (art. 15)
  1. The Committee is deeply concerned at the number of cases of coercive treatment of persons admitted to psychiatric institutions, and at the methods used in coercive and involuntary treatment of persons with disabilities in psychiatric institutions, in particular the use of straps or belts for more than 48-hours, the use of chemical restraints or the reportedly frequent application of involuntary electro-convulsive therapy.
  2. The Committee recommends that the State party amend the laws and regulations in order to abolish the use of physical, chemical and other medical non-consensual measures with regard to persons with psychosocial disabilities in institutions. It particularly recommends that the State party provide training on treatment in accordance with the Convention to medical professionals and personnel in care and other similar institutions on the prevention of torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Freedom from exploitation, violence and abuse (art. 16)
  1. The Committee is concerned at reports showing the level of abuse, exploitation and violence, including domestic violence, to which various categories of persons with disabilities are being exposed, and at the limited number of shelters accessible to victims of such acts, as well as the lack of training of police and other interlocutors. The Committee is also concerned about the lack of available disaggregated data on the reports of abuse, exploitation and violence by persons with disabilities and their outcomes.
  2. The Committee recommends that the Governments of Denmark, the Faroe Islands and Greenland ensure that violence and abuse against all persons with disabilities is duly reported and investigated; that necessary support for victims is available including accessible hotlines, shelters, services and complaints mechanisms; and that the issue is addressed in national training courses for personnel working in health and medical care, schools, the police force and the judiciary. The Committee also recommends that the Governments collect disaggregated data and statistics on the reports of abuse, exploitation and violence by persons with disabilities and their outcomes.
Living independently and being included in the community (art. 19)
  1. The Committee is concerned about the increased construction by municipalities, with State-guaranteed loans, of large institution-like residences for persons with disabilities with 30-60 and even more residents, often outside city centers. It is also concerned about the recent surveys indicating the limited possibility for persons with disabilities to choose freely where to live, including the instances of forced relocation.
  2. The Committee recommends that the State party end the use of State-guaranteed loans to build institution-like residences for persons with disabilities; that it amend the legislation on social services so that persons with disabilities may choose freely where and with whom they live, while enjoying the necessary assistance to live independently; and that it take measures to close existing institution-like residences and prevent forced relocation of persons with disabilities to avoid isolation from the community.
Freedom of expression and opinion, and access to information (art. 21)
  1. The Committee is concerned that certain groups of deaf persons, in particular the deaf born children who have been implanted with cochlear implants are reportedly prevented from learning and communicating in the Danish Sign Language (DSL). The Committee is also concerned that the recent amendment to the Danish Language Council Act does not promote DSL through research or training.
  2. The Committee recommends that the State party recognize all deaf person’s and deaf born person’s right to have the possibility to learn and communicate in DSL regardless of medical treatments acquired; take effective measures to promote DSL as a communication method without necessarily resorting to a speech therapy; carry out research in DSL, including the development of DSL dictionary; and promote the use of DSL in all areas of deaf persons’ lives to ensure participation in particular in employment, education and cultural life. The Committee furthermore recommends that the Government of the Faroe Islands recognize Faroese sign language as an official language.
  3. The Committee acknowledges that Braille is an important communication tool for blind persons in education and employment. It is however concerned that education in Braille is not systematically provided to all blind pupils, as they are scattered and few in numbers. The Committee is also concerned that the decentralized structure and responsibility of municipalities may not be appropriate to maintain such a specialized tool, and that the State party perceives a risk of dilution of knowledge in education with specialized support as indicated during the dialogue.
  4. The Committee recommends that the State party establish a Braille Council with the task of promoting, preserving and enhancing knowledge and use of Braille as a communication tool for blind persons, including in education.
  5. The Committee is concerned that the State party does not effectively guarantee provision of information to people with intellectual and mental disabilities in accessible, alternative and augmentative modes and formats of communication.
  6. The Committee recommends that the State party accord equal recognition to the development and promotion of Augmentative and Alternative modes of Communication (AAC) that are accessible to people with intellectual and mental disabilities. The State Party should take appropriate measures to ensure that all actors are familiar with the established standards of using AAC and put in place effective monitoring procedures that prevent acts of substituted information and communication, especially in decision making mechanisms of people with intellectual and mental disabilities.
Respect for privacy (art. 22)
  1. The Committee is concerned that psychiatric hospitals are allowed, under the Psychiatric Act, to transfer strictly private and confidential information to third parties without the consent of the person concerned.
  2. The Committee recommends that the State party amend the Psychiatric Act by prohibiting the transfer of private and confidential information of patients in psychiatric hospitals to third parties, without consent of the person concerned, in order to comply with the principle of respect for privacy.
Education (art. 24)
  1. While noting a Government reform to promote inclusion of children with disabilities in the general education system, the Committee is concerned at the lack of clarity to what extent pupils with disabilities can receive adequate support and accommodation to facilitate their education, and the discrepancies in accomplishment rates between pupils with and without disabilities in elementary, secondary and higher education.
  2. The Committee recommends that the State party amend its legislation to ensure the inclusion of all children with disabilities in the mainstream education system, including the adequate support and accommodation, in particular through the adequate training to teachers and other employees in the school system in all parts of the Kingdom of Denmark, to ensure quality education for pupils with disabilities. The State party should take measures to address discrepancies in accomplishment rates between pupils with and without disabilities at all levels of education.
  3. The Committee is concerned at reports that children in need of more than 9 hours of special education per week may submit a complaint to the Special Education Board, unlike children with less than 9 hours of special education per week who cannot submit a complaint to an independent authority regarding a lack of adequate educational support.
  4. The Committee recommends that the State party amend its legislation to ensure that all children with disabilities can submit a complaint to an independent authority if they do not receive adequate educational support.
Health (art. 25)
  1. The Committee is concerned at information indicating that persons with psychosocial disabilities have a life-expectancy which is 15 – 20 years shorter compared to persons without psychosocial disabilities.
  2. The Committee recommends that the State party ensure that persons with disabilities, in particular persons with psychosocial disabilities, have equal access to the highest attainable standard of health, including by providing adequate and accessible health services needed by persons with disabilities and by training health professionals and officials of the public health authorities, including on the right to free and informed consent.
Work and employment (art. 27)
  1. The Committee notes with concern that while the Act on Prohibition against Discrimination in the Labour Market prohibits direct and indirect differential treatment on grounds of disability, neither the general labour legislation nor collective labour agreements stipulate clear obligations on employers to comply with reasonable accommodation in the labour market which may be among the sources of a prevailing employment gap between persons with (44 per cent working) and without disabilities (78 per cent working).
  2. The Committee recommends that the State party take all necessary measures to significantly increase, as soon as possible, the percentage of persons with disabilities working in the open labour market, including the amendments to the general labour legislation for it to impose clear obligations on employers to afford reasonable accommodation for employees with disabilities.
Participation in political and public life (art. 29)
  1. The Committee is concerned that under the Constitution, Parliamentary Elections Act and other election laws, and the Guardianship Act (Section 6) persons under guardianship are not allowed to vote or to stand for election during parliamentary, municipal, regional and European Parliament elections, and referendums. The Committee is also concerned that election materials are reportedly rarely accessible to blind persons or to persons with learning and intellectual disabilities; that polling stations are often not physically accessible; that ballots may not be accessible to blind persons; and that persons under guardianship may not choose freely a voting assistance.
  2. The Committee recommends that the State party amend the relevant laws, including the Parliamentary Elections Act and other laws governing municipal, regional and European Parliament election so that all persons with disabilities can enjoy the right to vote and stand for election regardless of guardianship or other regimes. It also recommends that the State party ensure, through legislative and other measures, the accessibility of ballots and election materials, and polling stations, and that adequate and necessary assistance of free choice is provided to facilitate voting by all persons.
Participation in cultural life, recreation, leisure and sport (art. 30)
  1. The Committee is concerned that the State party has not ratified the Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are Blind, Visually Impaired, or Otherwise Print Disabled, which allows access to published material to blind persons, persons with visual impairments or persons with other difficulties in having access to printed materials.
  2. The Committee encourages the State party to adopt all appropriate measures to ratify and implement the Marrakesh Treaty as soon as possible.
C. Specific obligations (arts. 31–33)
Statistics and data collection (art. 31)
  1. While noting the efforts to collect statistical data on persons with disabilities in Denmark, including IT data collection on assistance and benefits to persons with disabilities in Greenland, and general data collection in the Faroe Islands, the Committee regrets the low level of disaggregated data on persons with disabilities.
  2. The Committee recommends that the State party systematize the collection, analysis and dissemination of data, disaggregated by gender, age and disability and region; enhance capacity-building in this regard; and develop gender and age-sensitive indicators, with due regard to the need to move from the medical- to the human rights-based approach to disability.
National implementation and monitoring (art. 33)
  1. While noting the operation of the State party’s Inter-Ministerial Committee, the Committee is concerned that it seeks inputs from representative organizations of persons with disabilities in Denmark only occasionally, and there is an absence of such coordination with representative organizations of persons with disabilities in the Faroe Islands and Greenland. The Committee is also concerned at the absence of coordination and of independent monitoring mechanisms in the Faroe Islands.
  2. The Committee recommends that the State party enable civil society and in particular representative organizations of persons with disabilities to fully and regularly participate in monitoring of the implementation of the Convention. The State party should also take necessary measures for the establishment or designation of a coordination mechanism, and of an independent monitoring mechanism, in the Faroe Islands. The Committee also recommends that the Faroese Government establish a human rights institution for the promotion and protection of human rights, in accordance with the Paris Principles.
Follow-up and dissemination
  1. The Committee requests that the State party, within 12 months and in accordance with article 35, paragraph 2, of the Convention, provide information on the measures taken to implement the Committee’s recommendation as set forth in paragraph 21 – Forced hospitalization and treatment of children in psychiatric hospitals above.
  2. The Committee requests the State party to implement the recommendations of the Committee as contained in the present concluding observations. It recommends that the State party transmit the concluding observations for consideration and action to members of the Governments and Parliaments, officials in relevant ministries, local authorities and members of relevant professional groups, such as education, medical and legal professionals, as well as to the media, using modern social communication strategies.
  3. The Committee strongly encourages the State party to involve civil society organizations, in particular organizations of persons with disabilities, in the preparation of its periodic report.
  4. The Committee requests the State party to disseminate the present concluding observations widely, including to non-governmental organizations and representative organizations of persons with disabilities, as well as to persons with disabilities themselves and members of their families, in national and minority languages, including sign language, and in accessible formats, and to make them available on the government website on human rights.
Next report
  1. The Committee requests the State party to submit its combined second and third periodic reports by no later than 24 August 2019, and to include therein information on the implementation of the present concluding observations. The Committee invites the State party to consider submitting the above-mentioned reports under the Committee’s simplified reporting procedure, according to which the Committee prepares a list of issues at least one year prior to the due date set for the combined reports of a State party. The replies of a State party to such a list of issues constitute its next report.
* * Adopted by the Committee at its twelfth session (15 September – 2 October 2014).

Twice Exceptional Denmark

Twice Exceptional Denmark er lavet for dobbelt exceptionelle børn dvs. børn med særlige forudsætninger som samtidig har indlæringsvanskeligheder. Disse børn kan have opmærksomheds-, koncentrations- og kontakt- vanskeligheder som oftest er pga. Ordblindhed/ Dyslexi, ADHD, AS, PDD NOS, OCD, Tourette osv.

Det ofte set at Børn med særlige forudsætninger er af natur Asynkron Udviklet dvs. det halter med at deres emotionelle og sociale udvikling følger med det som ses ved jævnaldrende, samtidig med at de lærer lynhurtigt det emner de er motiveret for og ender således ofte foran jævnaldrende i disse oråder, uden sparringspartner. Børnene ender ofte meget ”misforstået” og en tværfagligindsats er nødvendig hvis sådan en situation skal kunne vendes.

Tværfaglighed bør bestå af en BMSF konsulent/psykolog og derudover specialister jvf. barnets specifikke diagnoser og andre problemer hver gang handleplaner udarbejdes, barnets evalueres osv. Men der er langt vej endnu, da BMSF ikke anerkendes i Kommunerne, og dermed overses det at barnet har behov for en ”særlig” forståelse og indsigt for at børnene kan få den rette hjælp jvf. Socialloven og Inklusion.

Men desværre ses disse børn i AKT forløb, heldagsskoler og kan ende i Udsatte grupper:

De unge, som kommer til opholdsstederne, har været vanskelige at placere i de kommunale tilbud, hvor hverken de unge, som kommer til opholdstederne eller de elever, der går i de kommunale tilbud, vil profitere af at være sammen.