Yamaguchi, Satoru

Institutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB)

Reasonable accommodation in an institution of higher education : Support to students with disabilities

Niigata Regional Repository

52
Introduction
As part of the legislative preparation for the 
conclusion of the United Nations’ “Convention 
on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities”, the 
Persons with Disabilities Discrimination 
Elimination Act (hereinafter referred to as “the 
Act”) was enacted in June 2013 and will take 
effect from April 2016. The aim of this law is to 
advance the elimination of discrimination due to 
disability so as to realize a society, in which all 
citizens mutually respect each other’s personality 
and individuality and co-exist without being 
discriminated against because of disability. The 
definition of the disabled people covered by this 
law includes any person with “physical disability, 
intellectual disability, mental illness (including 
developmental disability) and any other disability 
to the function of the mind or body (hereinafter 
referred to generally as “disability”) that is in a 
situation where their daily or social lives are 
greatly restricted continuously due to disability or 
social disability” (Cabinet Office, 2015).
The outline of the Act
This Act is an independent act that embodies 
“the prohibition of infringement of rights by 
discrimination because of disability”, “the 
prevention of infringement of rights caused by 
neglecting to eliminate social disabilities”, and 
“the diffusion of education and knowledge by the 
state” stipulated in Article 4 of the Basic Act for 
Disabled Persons. “Unfair discriminative 
treatment” and “prohibition of the lack of provision 
of reasonable accommodation” can be offered as 
examples of measures taken to eradicate 
discrimination. Additionally, “conflict resolution/
consultation”, “regional cooperation”, “educational 
activities”, and “information gathering etc.” can be 
offered as examples of supporting measures taken 
to eradicate discrimination (Cabinet Office, 2015). 
Furthermore, the handling of “unfair discriminative 
treatment” and “prohibition of the lack of provision 
of reasonable accommodation” relative to the type 
of institution of higher education is as follows 
(Table 1).
The scope of reasonable accommodation
Here we explain the approach to reasonable 
accommodation taken by institutions of higher 
education. Firstly, the range of students who are 
eligible for reasonable accommodation is defined 
as any person who wishes to enroll or enter an 
institution or university, or any student who is 
already enrolled in such an institution (including 
credited auditors, research students, and overseas 
students etc.). Furthermore, the range of students 
with disabilities is defined as any student who is 
in a situation where their daily or social lives are 
Reasonable accommodation in an institution of higher education 
–Support to students with disabilities–
Satoru Yamaguchi
Department of Social Welfare, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, Niigata, Japan
Received: 25 January 2016
Corresponding author: Satoru Yamaguchi
Department of Social Welfare, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, 1398 Shimami-cho, Kita-ku, Niigata 950-3198, Japan
TEL/FAX: +81-25-257-4509, E-mail: satoru-yamaguchi@nuhw.ac.jp
Invited article
53
Niigata Journal of Health and Welfare Vol. 15, No. 1
greatly restricted continuously due to disability or 
social disability*. Additionally, the scope of 
student activities is defined as all educational 
matters such as classes, extracurricular classes, 
and participation in school events etc. 
Next, the details of the scope of Reasonable 
accommodation are as follows. Within the 
campus, “commuting support, on-campus 
assistance (meals, toilet etc.), moving around on 
campus, regular curriculum education (lectures, 
seminars,  laboratory/practical  classes), 
postgraduate research guidance, self study 
(preparation/review etc.), extracurricular 
education (student consultation, employment 
guidance, study guidance etc.), scholarship 
application, use of facilities (library, information 
processing room, student accommodation etc.), 
obtaining information, entrance exams, exams, 
course registration, school events (entrance 
ceremony, graduation ceremony, orientation) etc.” 
can be offered as examples. Off campus, activities 
such as “field work, teaching practice, internships, 
school events (entrance ceremony, graduation 
ceremony, orientation, entrance exams) etc.” can 
be given as examples.
Points to note regarding legal interpretation
The following are important points regarding 
legal interpretation. First, unfair discriminative 
treatment and the prohibition of the lack of 
provision of reasonable accommodation do not 
cover individuals. This is because of the notion 
that legally restricting the ideas and speech or 
actions of an individual citizen who is not a 
business entity is inappropriate. Next, any 
discrimination between people with disabilities is 
not subject to this law. Unfair discriminative 
treatment is described as “to unfairly discriminate 
against someone due to disability and treat them 
differently from those without disability (article 7 
and 8 of the Act)” and does not go as far as 
covering situations where the discrimination takes 
place between disabled persons. Finally, this law 
does not cover any indirect discrimination. As the 
primary subject of the act is the disabled person, 
for example, any actions directed at the parent of 
Table 1. Points regarding Institutions of Higher Education (Cabinet Office, 2015)
Unfair discriminative 
treatment
Reasonable accommodation 
provided to disabled persons
National and Public Universities • 
Technical Colleges etc.
(= National administrative body • 
Local public body etc.)
Prohibited Legal duty
U n f a i r  d i s c r i m i n a t i v e 
treatment is prohibited
Must provide reasonable 
accommodation for disabled 
persons
Incorporated Educational Institution, 
Company set up school (= Private 
business persons※)
Prohibited Obligation to make an effort
U n f a i r  d i s c r i m i n a t i v e 
treatment is prohibited
Must strive to provide 
reasonable accommodation for 
disabled persons
Note: The legal imposition on private business entities to offer reasonable accommodation is currently 
the subject of review in its third year after enactment. 
*: social disabilities refers to “any things (traffic, facilities and equipment that are difficult to use), institutions (which are difficult to 
utilize), customs (traditions and culture which may not take into account the existence of people with disabilities), ways of thinking 
(prejudice towards people with disabilities) and anything else within a society that can become an obstacle to leading a normal daily 
and social life for someone with a disability”. It is the notion that disability is not just an individual problem but that the issue also lies 
with society and the environment.
54
the disabled student is not considered 
discrimination. However, if the parent visits an 
event such as an open campus or job fair with the 
disabled s tudent  and receives  unfa i r 
discriminatory treatment due to the disability of 
the aforementioned disabled student, then it is 
covered under this Act.
Example case study
Although this is not an example involving a 
student with disabilities, it is an interesting 
reasonable accommodation case regarding 
physical disability. 
This case is about June Kailes (61) who is a 
disability policy consultant at the Western 
University of Health Sciences in California. She 
has cerebral palsy and has been using a steering 
wheel type electric wheelchair for over 20 years. 
She came to Japan as part of a foreign researcher 
invitation project hosted by the Japanese Society 
for Rehabilitation of Persons with Disabilities. 
Before returning home, she and her husband 
wanted to do some sightseeing and booked two 
tickets on the Shinkansen from Tokyo station to 
Kyoto station at Japan Railways Shinjuku Station. 
However, as they went through the automatic 
ticket checker machines at Tokyo station, they 
were surrounded by 12 station staff and were 
stopped on the grounds that they could not allow 
steering wheel type wheelchairs as they could not 
cope with them in an emergency. Ms. Kailes 
explained that she would walk on and off the train 
by herself, and that the wheelchair could be taken 
apart and carried on as hand luggage but this was 
also rejected. The station staff conferred for an 
hour and suggested a compromise whereby they 
would lend Ms. Kailes a manual wheelchair and 
would keep her electric wheelchair at the station 
until her return. JR Central suggested this so the 
couple could “at least somehow travel”, but for 
Ms. Kailes, who also has a disability in her hands, 
manual wheelchairs are very hard to manage and, 
in the end, the couple gave up going to Kyoto 
(“Steering wheel type wheelchair refused entry”, 
2010). Ms. Kailes alluded to the guaranteed right 
of fair participation in society by saying what she 
found most difficult to understand was “why 
would you make such a big deal of this when all 
it would take to fix it would be a small change in 
the rules. It (the change) really isn’t a big 
problem, is it?” (“Steering wheel type wheelchair 
refused entry”, 2010). 
Conclusion
Finally, it would be fortunate if this could lead 
to more opportunities to think about the support 
given to students with disabilities by furthering 
understanding of “reasonable accommodation in 
an institution of higher education” as explained in 
this paper, taking into account the example given 
above. The enactment of this law will shift the 
support given to students with disabilities in 
institutions of higher education from “the 
goodwill of staff” to “strict observance of law as 
an obligation upon the institution as a business 
entity”. One sincerely hopes that the 
reinforcement of the educational system 
following this law change will lead to support 
that will allow students with disabilities to have 
fair opportunities.
References
1. Cabinet Office. Shougai wo riyuu to suru 
sabetsu no kaishou no suishin ni kansuru 
houritsu. Law regarding the promotion of 
elimination of discrimination due to 
disability. Cabinet Office of the Government 
of Japan. Retrieved from http://www8.cao.
go.jp/shougai/suishin/law_h25-65.html. 
(2015) (in Japanese)
2. Cabinet Office. Shougai wo riyuu to suru 
sabetsu no kaishou no suishin ni kansuru 
kihon houshin. Basic policy regarding the 
promotion of elimination of discrimination 
due to disability. Cabinet Office of the 
Government of Japan. Retrieved from http://
55
Niigata Journal of Health and Welfare Vol. 15, No. 1
www8.cao.go.jp/shougai/suishin/sabekai/
kihonhoushin/honbun.html. (2015) (in 
Japanese)
3. Cabinet Office. Shougaisha sabetsu kaishou 
hou leaflet. Leaflet of elimination of 
discrimination to disabled persons. Cabinet 
Office of the Government of Japan. 
Retrieved from www8.cao.go.jp/shougai/
suishin/pdf/sabekai_leaflet_p.pdf. (2015) (in 
Japanese)
4. Handoru gata kurumaisu jyousha kyohi. 
Steering wheel type wheel chair refused 
entry. (2010, December 20). Chunichi 
Newspaper. 20. (in Japanese)
5. Handoru gata kurumaisu jyousha kyohi. 
Steering wheel type wheel chair refused 
entry. (2010, December 20). Chunichi 
Newspaper. 20. (in Japanese)


http://nirr.lib.niigata-u.ac.jp/bitstream/10623/71947/1/052_055_e1501.pdf

Reasonable accommodation in an institution of higher education : Support to students with disabilities

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Institutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB)

Niigata Regional Repository