To Think that Disability Shouldn't be a Trump Card

[MissAustenMadeAQuilt]

Don't know how to link but the case is easy to find.

Martin Madden worked for the Met Police as a civilian worker.

He made many crude, lewd and sexual remarks to women co-workers and eventually he was sacked for this.

He has gone to a tribunal. As he was diagnosed with ADHD in 2022, the judge found that he was disabled and was not aware that his actions were inappropriate.

He will now be compensated.

This, and the recent Tourettes case where a racial slur was excused because of disability, makes me wonder if ADHD and Tourettes will now be a "Get Out of Jail Free" card and it is PoC and Women who will suffer the consequences.

I do have a skin in the game. I am woman and have a mixed race child.

AIBU?

There are two things here.

An adult man whether diagnosed with ADHD or not, cannot possibly have got to adulthood without knowing that making crude, lewd and sexual remarks to women is all kinds of wrong.

Tourette's Syndrome produces involuntary tics, and therefore the person will know their language is wrong but they will often have absolutely no control over it.

I doubt the judge found that he was not aware his actions were inappropriate simply due to an adhd diagnosis.

i am not aware of the case but my dd has adhd and I’m pretty sure you don’t get to just tell the court ms oh I have adhd I’m allowed to do what I want.

or at least if that is the case I’d like to know how she signs up for it. I presume there is a list somewhere of people who have adhd are allowed to break the law?

You’re unreasonable to compare the two cases.

I'm shocked at this. My teen has ADHD and autism. He knows what's appropriate and what isn't, because he's not a sleazy fuckwit.

Tourettes is different and the person literally has no control and will most likely be just as upset about what they've said as the person they've said it to.

This - you cannot compare ADHD with Tourettes in this context.

I think you’re confused. There was no ‘Tourette’s case’, it was an awards show where, unfortunately the right of people of colour not to be subjected to racial slurs clashed with the equal right of a person with a disability to not have to be sequestered because of it. The controversy was more about why the BBC didn’t delete the term from the broadcast, which wasn’t live.

Agreed.

And the BBC were wrong to broadcast the language used by Tourette's sufferer John Davidson at the BAFTAs.

Yabu to compare those two. You should watch I Swear, the movie about John that was up for awards that night and that is why he was there.

Why?

The disabilities are the reason that their behaviour has been excused.

I suppose I'm feeling a but raw because last week my mixed race child and a her friend had a group of other children shout racist remarks at them followed by laughing and sarcastically shouting,

"Sorry, we've got Tourettes. We Can't help it."

It was dealt with well by the school but it still happened and I imagine it will happen again.

And now this man has had a judge agreeing with him that his ADHD means he is not to blame.

For those who doubt it happened a simple Google search of the terms " Martin Madden" + "The Met" + "ADHD" + "Lewd"

You will see that it his ADHD was accepted as an excuse.

report on the madden case

(daily mail, sorry)

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15629471/amp/Police-worker-wins-discrimination-case-claiming-not-stop-making-sexual-innuendos-ADHD.html

Educate yourself. Saying someone is excused for making a racial slur because of tourettes as if that isn't appropriate is the same as blaming someone with epilepsy for knocking something over during a seizure or someone with Parkinson's spilling a drink. It's absurd.

You need to acknowledge the difference between a deliberate action and a neurological symptom.

Your ablist attitude is disgusting. Just for a moment, imagine how hard it must be for someone with tourettes to try and engage in day to day life when they face people with attitudes like yours! Maybe they should just stay at home where they can't accidentally upset someone??

Look it up.

There must be more to this case - the judge sounds delusional otherwise.

Those children did not have Tourette’s.

racism is not ok.

but those children are not disabled and are not using disability as a trump card because they are not disabled. They are simply being racist and you should report this to school and anyone else appropriate.

Here’s the tribunal judgement - it’s a bit more nuanced than what is reported in the press

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/69a5491c286b6fdc85daeb23/Martin_Madden_v_Commissioner_of_Police_of_the_Metropolis_2305065-2024_Judgment.pdf

The 2 cases are incomparable.

Well that is clearly awful but it's not the fault of anyone who has a genuine neurological disorder, is it??

We're back to the fault lying with the BBC broadcasting it, not the man who said it.

Ok rather than going by the Mail’s sensationalised reporting, this gives a good breakdown of why they found (partially) in his favour. It’s a long but interesting read. And no, it does not mean disability is a Trump card. It means they should always find a way to balance everybody’s needs.

https://enna.org/adhd-workplace-banter-and-dismissal-what-a-recent-tribunal-case-teaches-employers/amp/

Where the disciplinary process went wrong
The tribunal identified several issues that ultimately undermined the fairness of the dismissal.
Important evidence was not considered
Two key pieces of evidence submitted by the claimant were not included in the disciplinary panel’s documentation.
These included:

• a detailed legal submission from his solicitor
• a statement from his psychotherapist explaining the behavioural work he had been doing and the progress he had made

The tribunal found that these documents could have been highly relevant mitigation. Because the panel never considered them, the decision-making process was viewed as unsafe. The claimant’s ADHD was not properly considered Although the employer accepted that Madden had ADHD, the tribunal found that the condition was not adequately considered when disciplinary action was being taken. There was little evidence that decision-makers properly reflected on how ADHD might have contributed to the behaviour. Given that ADHD can affect communication, impulse control and the interpretation of social boundaries, this was an important omission. The process involved significant delays The tribunal also highlighted that the disciplinary process took around nine months from investigation to hearing. The delay had a clear impact on the claimant’s mental health, which meant he was unable to attend the disciplinary hearing in person. Although he was allowed to answer questions in writing, the tribunal said this was not an equivalent alternative to participating in the hearing. The impact on colleagues was overstated Another issue was how the impact of the comments had been described. During the disciplinary process, it was suggested that the claimant had made three colleagues feel extremely uncomfortable. However, the tribunal found that this was not entirely accurate. Only one colleague reported feeling genuinely distressed, while the others mainly described the comments as inappropriate. This exaggeration influenced how the seriousness of the behaviour was assessed. Why the tribunal found discrimination arising from disability One of the most important legal questions was whether the behaviour leading to dismissal was linked to the claimant’s disability. The tribunal concluded that it was. Medical evidence showed that Madden’s ADHD affected his ability to read social cues and manage interpersonal communication. This meant the comments that led to disciplinary action were considered something arising in consequence of his disability. Because dismissal was not considered a proportionate response in the circumstances, the tribunal concluded that discrimination had occurred.

Ok. So reading the tribunal judgement:

he has more disabilities than just adhd (so I presume you presented this as just adhd because it has such a bad reputation. Quite manipulative don’t you think?)

he was told by his boss to stop and he did.

following that additional claims were made (of inappropriate behaviour outside work and from before he was told to stop)

and the management didn’t follow procedure.

so totally not adhd as a get out of jail card.

i’m sorry your daughter experiences racism.

my daughter has adhd and faces prejudice because of it.

don’t dump on other marginalised groups because you are also experiencing prejudice.

tackle the people who are doing it - the kids who upset your daughter.

Well he hasn’t done the ADHD community any favours has he?

People will be more weary of employing people who are more likely to take them to tribunal.

The case of the young man with ADHD should have been based on his capacity to understsnd his actions not his diagnosis
Tuorettes is different
Because a person can't help a vocal tic.

His disability was the reason for his behaviour. (his explanation) if he didn’t have his disability (which I’m sure he’d rather not) and his brain wasn’t wired that way, he may not have behaved that way.

It is very hard for people whose brains don’t function like a neurotypical person (the only acceptable brain function to have) to be constantly masking their differences in order to behave and come across as though their brain isn’t wired differently.

Imagine if I told you it was not acceptable to be yourself and you must behave like someone with ADHD at all times and never let the mask slip otherwise you’ll offend people who don’t understand your not the same as them?

I think you’re comparing apples with oranges.

it’s likely a grown man with ADHD, will be aware of what he said and what the ramifications of it would be. Tourette’s is involuntary, actually the more you try ‘not’ to say or do something, the more likely it is to happen.

Any disability should be judged on its own merit, your AIBU is a sweeping statement an two very different things