Someone telling everyone I have autism when I don’t have it

[Winterinwonderland]

In addition to my full time job I am a volunteer and executive trustee for a charity.

The charity chair set up a chat with a large number of people in it and told them I have autism. I do not have autism.

He also told them I had incidents at home. This was news to me having had no incidents at home.

A third party replied on the chat stating that I do not have autism and that there had not been any incidents at home. He was getting me mixed up with someone else.

He refused to accept this and has carried on telling everyone I have autism.

I have issued a GDPR SAR and Article 16 notice.
He has now blocked my access to IT systems and suspended me not following the governing document.

The other trustees have told him to make a rectification notice and apologise but he has refused. He has also been told the suspension was illegal and not authorised by the trustees.

This man has several complaints against him lodged with the charity commission for a large catalogue of issues. We all have our interviews this week.

AIBU take legal action against him for defamation or should I let it go. I am not willing to pursue the charity for obvious reasons.

I'd probably just withdraw my volunteering services from the charity and look for a new one to support. Legal action may be an option, I'm not a lawyer so I can't comment on your chance of a successful outcome but either way it's likely to be a long and stressful process.

Even if these things were true why would he be talking to other people about it?

Bloody hell OP, I'm so sorry this has happened to you. What a wierd lie to tell as well!
No advice, but I hope the interviews have the desired effect.

I think positioning suggested autism diagnosis as defamation is a slippery slope. Defamation is act of damaging someone's reputation. So if you take legal action on that basis, it will undeniably be seen as you thinking that autism diagnosis makes a person lesser. I would think carefully about how it may reflect on you professionally if the word was to get out.
Personally, I would let the charity take necessary action. I presume they would have grounds to dismiss him based on yours and other historical complaints. If not, I would volunteer elsewhere.

What does your governing document say about removing the Chair or removing trustees...presumably there is some sort of process whereby the other trustees can take action? It sounds like the rest of the Board would be supportive, and the Chair is clearly a liability!

Sounds awful OP. How about going to the papers to hand his ass back to him .. on a warm plate.

Would you sue him for ‘defamation’ if he told people you were diabetic when you weren’t?

I would explore defamation because it's not a judgment on the condition it's a judgement on the fact people with disabilities are unfortunately sometimes treated badly, this is the reality and therefore you don't want to be labeled with something you don't have. In addition, I'd report to the Information Commissioners Office because telling someone that you have a medical condition even if you don't, is still a data breach.

Labelling someone incorrectly is bullying, just complain him.

There have been mass resignations which is now going to make it difficult to get rid of him.
The Cc are aware.

When you say "incidents at home" what do you mean?

Criminal incidents? Accidentally setting the house on fire? Locking yourself out?

Has anyone reported this to Charities Commission? Not so much what he said about you, but the inappropriate sharing of (incorrect) information, not following the charities own guidance, not acting in accordance with majority of trustees clearly stated wishes, and the rest of the Board appearing to accept this (ie not getting rid of him).

Maybe send the Board a facrual outlune of events, citing the charities own documentation where its been breached. If no action is taken then can you report to Charities Commission?

Cross posted! Sorry!

Yes - every issue has been reported to the charity commission by approx 10 trustees. In the meantime I’m being penalised.

In what way are you being penalised?

I'm autistic (and diabetic). Actually I'd be pissed off if either of those were attributed to me if they weren't true.

Autism has a list of care needs, adjustments, expectations and stuff that comes along with it. I can imagine that being grating and patronising if it's not needed. Tbf they can come off grating and patronising even if they are ("you're so brave", "HELLOOO HOWWW AARE YOUUU TODAY", "hi Janice, I'm autistic not deaf you don't need to over enunciate every word".)

And in your example, actually being outed as a diabetic when there's no medical need for it can be a bit of a shit thing- assumptions made about how you eat, why you got it, lazy, greedy, fat, whatever. Does she have "good" diabetes (T1) or "naughty" diabetes (T2).

I'd support OP reacting strongly to either of those things.

I don’t think you could win a defamation case. He made an incorrect statement, which was immediately contradicted by somebody else.

Being autistic is not, intrinsically, a bad thing so you can’t say that it damages your reputation to be described as autistic.

I’d be really really careful of suggesting to anybody that you’re offended or upset by him saying you’re autistic, as that makes it sound like you think autism is automatically bad, which many autistic people (and family members, friends etc) would be offended and hurt by.

He just referred to incidents and didn’t expand.

I do not have any problems in my home life and there have not been any issues.

If he didn't expand then it is meaningless surely?

There is nothing wrong with discussing the issue with a legal professional and see what they suggest, the charity should have some contacts

It's literally in the OP: He has now blocked my access to IT systems and suspended me not following the governing document.

Blocked access.

I have copies of everything he said and he is aware I have the documentary evidence already in my possession.

Autism is a huge spectrum it is also a disability ( yes I know some people with autism don't consider themselves to be disabled )
, The Op.isn', autistic, so therefore shouldn't be described as such and even if she was its not the chairs place to tell.everyone it would be up.to the Op.

This man is trying to get you discounted as an unreliable witness during the charity commission investigation. That's fairly serious. OP you need to tell the charity commission about this during your interview with them. Especially if your charity regards mental illness or neurodivergence because he is trying to stigmatise you and is taking advantage of society's negative perceptions of neurodivergence.

Suing him for defamation is playing into his hands because that's what someone believing in and following the exact letter of the law would do (a common autism stereotype). You're better off brushing it off with "how silly, Bob seems confused again, Bob you're always telling tall tales about people! You should write a novel!"