When your child’s education is on the line, every conversation with a school team feels like walking a tightrope: you want collaboration, but you also carry the weight of knowing that human rights are not polite suggestions — they are legal obligations owed to your child.
And here’s the truth: the minute you bring up the Human Rights Code, the temperature in the room changes. A simple mention of the word accommodation can be received like a legal summons. The law is a light — but in schools, advocates are often told to dim it.
Parents, especially mothers, are often told to be “reasonable,” “measured,” and “constructive,” even while watching their child drown in unmet need. Institutions expect you to serve your truth with a smile and a pink logo. It’s oppression light and the harm is the same, but the tone is softer.
25 legal lightning bolts to strike down excuses
Schools have a repertoire of deflections — “we’ve done what we can,” “she seems fine,” “we’ll make adjustments as needed.” This is your counter-arsenal, built from the BC Human Rights Code, tribunal decisions, and lived advocacy. Each one reframes the conversation, keeps the focus on your child’s right to access, and makes the law unignorable.
- Accommodation is not a prize: it’s scaffolding for success and the law demands it
- Partial ramps don’t work: a barrier is a barrier until it’s gone
- Delay equals harm: the duty starts the moment need is seen
- Behaviour is a message: fix the environment, not the child
- Big reactions mean big needs: they’re alarms, not attitude problems
- Bullying is an access issue: vulnerability demands protection
- Calm is not comfort: masking pain still hurts
- Children are not the claimants: the duty belongs to the school
- Collaboration is the law: refusal to adapt is refusal to comply
- Consultation comes first: decisions without parents are defective
- Dignity is access: shame blocks the door
- No paperwork? No problem: known need triggers the duty
- Empathy is a two-way street: overwhelm is not a lack of compassion
- Collapse is not defiance: support, don’t punish
- Fierce is fair: urgency is a right, not a threat
- Awareness demands action: noticing is not enough
- Impact is what counts: intent doesn’t erase harm
- Invisible needs are real needs: visibility is not the test
- Masking is survival: it’s exhausting, not proof of thriving
- Tone policing is obstruction: urgency is collaboration in action
- Diagnosis is not a starting gate: need comes first
- Schools must act: harm activates the duty, no magic words required
- Distress is harm: low grade distress meets the legal test for harm
- The discrimination test is your sword: disability + harm + link = protection
- Support that works must stay: withdrawal without process is denial
Why this matters now
Every time a parent is persuaded to “tone it down,” to wait, to try the usual way, the law dims a little in that room. Schools are banking on that dimming. Your legal language is what keeps the path open, not just for your child, but for every child who comes after.
Learn more
Also see: Kim Block’s excellent summer series:
- Part 1 – Duty to Accommodate – Power of the Human Rights Code
- Part 2(A) – Duty to Accommodate – Discrimination Test
- Part 2(B) – Duty to Accommodate – Reasonable Justification
- Part 3 – Duty to Accommodate – Meaningful Inquiry
- Part 4 – Duty to Accommodate – Duty to Consult
- Part 5 – Duty to Accommodate – Duty to Facilitate
- Part 6 – Duty to Accommodate – Pulling it all together
-
Shining a legal light on advocacy conversations
How to speak from a foundation of human rights while staying grounded in care. Firm, quietly defiant responses for families navigating school denial, delay, or deflection—centred on…
