Would it be a reasonable adjustment?

So if a wheelchair cannot go in the second lift what I said is correct, although I was not aware it uses a lift that is out of bounds to wheelchairs.

Why are you asking if she can stand when she is a wheelchair user, don't you think if she could stand she would not need the wheelchair?

This is where I get annoyed when people see wheelchair users and don't understand disabled people's needs and just why there is the Equality Act. Simply asking that question could be construed as discriminatory.

I think we are confusing the Human Rights Act ( which the effect of codifying the protections in the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law) with the Equality Act 2010 that replaced 3 sets of previous anti-discrimination laws (Sex Discrimination Act 1975 , Race Relations Act 1976 , Disability Discrimination Act 1995) with a single Act

https://www.gov.uk/equality-act-2010-guidance


http://www.equalityhuman...-rights/human-rights-act

Obviously, the Equality Act 2010 has the same goals as the four major EU Equal Treatment Directives, whose provisions it mirrors and implements

You have to also look at French law not just the UK's Equality Act which does not apply in France. However in all cases it is what is reasonable that has to be considered inclusive of fire and rescue and security and its very unfortunate that some people cannot access all areas

Chris I don't think it was a stupid suggestion it was not made clear at the beginning that she could not stand there are thousands of people out there who need wheelchairs for distance and are able to stand or walk aided but not for long distances. Don't beat yourself up it was a valid.

How can asking the question if she can walk or stand aided or assisted be deemed as discriminatory.
Is the Dr discriminating when they ask these questions. Or a company when they ask if you need any special requirements. Discriminatory I don't think so. It was a reasonable question.

There are deep issues arising out of Firesafety's posting.

I went to a large local hotel on Monday. It is listed as fully accessible for the disabled. At one side of the façade is a separate entrance clearly signed disabled entrance. Up the ramp I wheeled myself to be confronted by 1/2 inch layer of wet pigeon droppings, thank god for my wheelchair gloves. Got to the top and there was no handle on the door and it was outward opening!!!!!!! even I could have opened it. Back to the front door - a beautiful array of steps very wide, 30ft, and a section could easily have been ramped. Rang reception and surly woman agreed to send Janitor to open the disabled entrance. 5 more minutes in the rain and the disabled door opened. It was actually a fire escape door and only 2ft 2" wide - too narrow for my wheelchair as the door thickness took up 2" of opening width.

I suppose the FS has to be grateful he knew of the problems. But why should the disabled be served properly at the whims of persons who have no concept it seems of what it is to be disabled. Unfortunately much of the continent is not well served for the disabled - The US however is a very different kettle of fish. Try parking in a disabled bay without a permit and see how New York's finest draw their weapon to ensure that you do move NOW and pay the spot fine.

Here is an interesting page which I hope clarifies the issue...

http://www.sagetraveling...ffel-Tower-Accessibility

In fact, the whole website looks quite good and useful.

I hope your daughter enjoys her trip and gets the most out of it. Unfortunately with some historic buildings and landmarks, "reasonable" adjustments are just not possible, but to be honest, I have been to Paris loads of times and never gone up the Eiffel Tower even as far as the 2nd Landing and I don't feel I have missed out.

I have two comments to make on this.

Firstly, to resent a question about whether someone who uses a wheelchair can stand if supported displays the sort of generalisation that disabled people themselves resent. Just because someone uses a wheelchair to get around, it does not automatically follow that they cannot stand at all, so the question about this was quite valid.

Secondly, on the subject of disabled access, our record in this country is not brilliant. The Equality Act was preceded by the Disability Discrimination Act in 1995. This came into force in stages to allow various types of premises and vehicles to phase in adaptations, so businesses have now had nearly twenty years to implement the requirements, which were basically repeated in the Equality Act. Yet time after time, we come across premises that are difficult enough to get into on foot, and virtually impossible to access in a wheelchair, and the retail sector are the worst offenders. Whilst I can understand that clearing sufficient space for full wheelchair access in a small corner shop might not be considered a reasonable adjustment, there is simply no excuse for large shops and supermarkets. Countless times, we see shelving that has been fitted in such premises that allows good access, yet the management of such premises then proceed to clog up the aisles with additional displays, to try and wring the most out of the customers, and the needs of disabled customers are largely ignored. As far as I'm aware, no retail outlet has yet been taken to court over this, as unfortunately both the Acts are toothless as regards enforcement, and it is up to the individual to take the company to county court for redress; hardly likely to happen.